Talk:Narrowsburg, New York

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

New York (state) Mid‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article quality

I'm disappointed in the quality of this article as currently written. In tone it's more like a promotional brochure from a local tourist agency then an encyclopedia article. The article needs to be written from verifiable, reliable sources and these walls of unreferenced, unwikilinked text I think fall short of that standard. I'm not necessarily disputing the claims made in the current version; I've recently been to Narrowsburg and can personally attest to some of them. However, we need sources and we need neutral writing. I have also reverted the class of the article from B-class back to start. I have done this for two reasons:

An article shouldn't be re-assessed during a content dispute.
This article doesn't compare favorably to other B-class city articles; check some random examples in Category:B-Class WikiProject Cities articles and you'll see what I mean.

Anyway, I hope we can move forward collaboratively on improving this article. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 11:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Current info

Well, the current info on this page is neither cited, nor entirely correct or well written and as far from encyclopaedic than a dog is from a caterpillar. The tone of the article is that of a second grader with bad writing skills. What I had earlier at least sounded better, read better and was accurate. The primary purpose of an encyclopaedic entry is to provide info and that info cannot be trumped by syntax and arbitrary judgement of what constitutes "promotional" copy. Right now, as it stands, this article provides zero info and the deletion of the the copy I had makes it totally pointless in existence.

Additionally, hardly see a point of citing sources since I am a firsthand witness to the information posted. Original research matters a whole lot more than second hand write-ups.

Where is the 'eagle capital' referenced from? What is "The Commodore Murray Cup "? Why is this info on the page, unsourced?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Evangeline.a (talk • contribs) 03:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability for why Wikipedia cannot accept a first-hand account. Mackensen (talk) 13:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]