Talk:Parfums Caron: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:13, 20 February 2019

France Start‑class

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Business Start‑class

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Need of encyclopedic language, and potential copy right infringement issue

Almost entire article reads like fragrantica article, ^[1]fragrantica is a perfume blog. So, unless one is the author of the text, there is potential of copy right violation.And the article should have encyclopedic language, it reads like a blog entry, (not too many know about the powder, rumors about ruining fragrances,and other sentences which do not belong to encyclopedic standards of writing. And reliable sources needs to be quoted on wikipedia, blogs are quite different.Bialosz (talk) 23:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.fragrantica.com/designers/Caron.html

[1] ttp://www.fragrantica.com/designers/Caron.html

[1]

Revision as of 23:45, 21 August 2016 edit Bialosz (talk \| contribs) 203 edits mNo edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:13, 20 February 2019 edit undo GreenC bot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,521,419 edits Add {{reflist-talk}} to #Need of encyclopedic language, and potential copy right infringement issue (via reftalk bot) Next edit →
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Almost entire article reads like fragrantica article, <ref> http://www.fragrantica.com/designers/Caron.html</ref>fragrantica is a perfume blog. So, unless one is the author of the text, there is potential of copy right violation.And the article should have encyclopedic language, it reads like a blog entry, (not too many know about the powder, rumors about ruining fragrances,and other sentences which do not belong to encyclopedic standards of writing. And reliable sources needs to be quoted on wikipedia, blogs are quite different.[[User:Bialosz\|Bialosz]] ([[User talk:Bialosz\|talk]]) 23:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)		Almost entire article reads like fragrantica article, <ref> http://www.fragrantica.com/designers/Caron.html</ref>fragrantica is a perfume blog. So, unless one is the author of the text, there is potential of copy right violation.And the article should have encyclopedic language, it reads like a blog entry, (not too many know about the powder, rumors about ruining fragrances,and other sentences which do not belong to encyclopedic standards of writing. And reliable sources needs to be quoted on wikipedia, blogs are quite different.[[User:Bialosz\|Bialosz]] ([[User talk:Bialosz\|talk]]) 23:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

			{{reflist-talk}}