Talk:Josias I, Count of Waldeck-Eisenberg

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Josias I, Count of Waldeck-Eisenberg article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 6, 2023.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Royalty and Nobility

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of royalty and nobility on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Royalty and NobilityWikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityTemplate:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityRoyalty and Nobility articles

External links[edit]

The fact that an external link is functional is a necessary but not sufficient condition for its inclusion. For the external link under dispute here, there is an established consensus that it is a self-published site and its content is not reliable. Additionally, when an external link is disputed, it is excluded by default unless and until there is a positive consensus for inclusion. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that you finally decided to communicate in a normal way and give an explanation why you think this external link should be deleted. I strongly objected the way you "communicated" at first with incomprehensible abbreviations in the edit summary, or links to guidelines, effectively saying to me "find it out yourself". When you would have started with a message here, giving this explanation, instead of just deleting the link, we could have reached a solution in an amicable and civilised way. I have no problem with the link being deleted from the article, because I didn't add it. I simply didn't delete it when I rewrote the article, as I saw no valid reason to do so.

I also want to add some remarks about the apparent policy. The fact that it is a self-published website is something that doesn't convince me at all, as almost every website is self-published. The fact that the content isn't reliable also isn't very convincible to me, because Wikipedia isn't very reliable either. As long as the content of such websites isn't used as a source of information for the article, I personally see no valid reason not to mention them under the header external links. But, in my humble opinion, this external link isn't very important to the article. So, I see no reason to continue the edit war. Roelof Hendrickx (talk) 02:23, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]