Jump to content

Talk:Interstate 59

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled comments

[edit]

Please note that the closing paragraph of this article seems to stray from NPOV... --Robertb-dc 23:31, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Furthermore, this final paragraph was ripped from from a interstate highway reference page (http://www.ihoz.com/I59.html). The reason it sounds biased is because it was meant as a rebuttal to the insinuation that Interstate 59 is useless.

[edit]

I'd like to know exactly how adding a link to a valid, well-researched page counts as "spam." I really ought not have to encounter such a fight to add relevant information to Wikipedia. --Larrysphatpage 07:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is clearly a link normally to be avoided: "A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link." —C.Fred (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Interstate 59. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]