Talk:Lines of Stollhofen

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Low‑importance 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. European history Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Fortifications / European / German This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Fortifications task force European military history task force German military history task force

The contents of the Bühl-Stollhofen Line page were its talk page .

This article was edited to contain a total or partial translation of Bühl-Stollhofener Linie from the German Wikipedia. Consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors. (This notice applies to version 668909232 and subsequent versions of this page.)

Moved from the article space

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article may require copy editing for See Also section should be put in to text, rather than a list.. You can assist by editing it. (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Lines of Stollhofen" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this message) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

In the opinion of user:Dmol

"See Also section should be put in to text, rather than a list."

Yes that is true, but this is a {{stub}}, and to do it the list would have to carry in-line citations. Would you like to carry out the work? -- PBS (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Stub:

A stub is an article containing only one or a few sentences of text that, although providing some useful information, is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, and that is capable of expansion.

and

Whether a link belongs in the "See also" section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense. The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number. As a general rule the "See also" section should not repeat links which appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes. Thus, many high-quality, comprehensive articles do not have a "See also" section.

What exactly is it that you (Dmol) want to see changed? -- PBS (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I want to see changed is exactly what was listed on the tag - See Also section should be put in to text, rather than a list.

I'm sorry, but what about that request is not clear. You have a two line article, and a list that actually gives more info than the text. I know this is a stub, but that is why these tags are use, to indicate the improvements needed.--Dmol (talk) 22:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary or desirable to swamp a small stub with banners such as the one you placed on the top of the article. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid "Mentioning that the article is being read on Wikipedia, or to Wikipedia policy or technicalities of using Wikipedia should be avoided where possible." Yet this is precisely what you are doing with this banner. So what guideline can you point to that argues that templates such as the one you used should be placed in article space? Why do you think the that talk pages exist? Why not do what I have done and place your comments on the talk page?-- PBS (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There four solutions.

1. The text can be expanded,
2. the see also can be reduced
3. The article with banner can stay as it is
4. The banner you have put on the top can be removed.

You say " I want to see changed is exactly what was listed on the tag - See Also section should be put in to text, rather than a list." Then why don't you do it? - PBS (talk) 00:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My original concerns about the article still stand, but life's too short to worry about this sort of thing. Removing it from my watch list.--Dmol (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100204015546/http://www.buehl.de:80/index.php to http://www.buehl.de/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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) 17:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to Lines of Stollhofen covers the same subject like this article. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 08:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I was the original author a heads up would have been nice. If so I would have explained why the merger should have been tbe othe way around:

• The common name in English.
• consistency, most of these types of article is styled "Lines of ....".
• copyright reasons. It is usual to keep the edit history of the oldest article, so that a third party can not claim copyright on the oldest text. If the other name is more appropriate then first merge the newer text into the older article and then request a page move.

For all these reasons I have reverted the direction of merge so it now goes from the newer article (

Bühl-Stollhofen Line) into to the older one (Lines of Stollhofen). -- PBS (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]