Talk:Shipwreck Conservation Centre

Poland Low‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Museums Low‑importance

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Page Curation (pov, notability, primary sources)[edit]

Sorry, but I can't agree with imputations.

There is no OR at all. All informations are from Museum web-site.

Making article I try to filter all POV (natural on owner web-site). Presently, only modern equipment may be considered as "not neutral" but it's proper description. (Some similar workshops complain for lack of modern equipment and necessity to use old tools and machines).

I don't suppose, museum, part of National Museum, containing reamins of XVth century ships and older boats is not notable. Therefore I would like to ask you for rmovind template. Ciacho5 (talk) 11:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since User:Chiacho5 asked me to comment on this, here I am. The tags have been added few days ago by User:Onel5969 with no rationale. As such, they can be removed at will by anyone who disagrees with them. In my own review, I find no justification for NPOV tag, nor for notability (museums are almost always notable). The only template which is justified is primary sources. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, Piotrus - First, when curating, there is no facility to add notes to the particular tags added, so there being no rationale is irrelevant. You are absolutely correct about the NPOV tag, don't know why I added it, could possibly have been a stray click. However, I am unaware of any inherent notability clause for museums. WP:GEOFEAT does not mention it, nor does WP:OUTCOMES, WP:MAPOUTCOMES in particular. WP:NPLACE (also in outcomes) does say that attractions "often survive AfD", but that does not mean that they are automatically considered notable. I didn't mark this for deletion because I feel that this very well might be notable, but that in its current condition it does not pass notability criteria. As such, I've returned the notability tag until its references are improved. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Onel5969: I checked Polish media ([1]) and I think there is enough coverage (despite this museum being very new, or perhaps because) that we can remove the notability tag (it would be nice if someone would integrate those refs into the article). Major outlets: Onet.pl ([2]), TVN24 ([3]), TVP3 ([4]) regional Radio Gdańsk, Dziennik Bałtycki and some lesser ones I don't recognize. But I think it suffices to remove the tag? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:37, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As long as the issue of notability has been addressed, of course the tag can be removed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]