Talk:Tuam Stars GAA
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Additional Info
[edit]Any extra info on former players and history would be greatly appreciated.Just add it to the relevant section.
Creaven07 (talk) 02:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Creaven07Creaven07 (talk) 02:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tuam Stars GAA. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100110131005/http://www.tuamstadium.com/History.html to http://www.tuamstadium.com/History.html
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) 07:23, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Plagiarism and copyright violation in History section
[edit]When I ran Earwig's Copyvio Detector on this article it detected copyright violation with 96.5% confidence! (Click here for details.)
So, clearly the first half of the history section was substantially plagiarised. The only question was whether they copied from us or us from them. As our content is woefully poorly referenced, and not written in encyclopaedic tone, I assumed the latter and I have removed it. The second half of the history section was over-detailed, unreferenced, non-neutral fan writing so I've removed that as well.
I've left a tiny stub of a history section so there is something to build on but it needs rewriting from scratch. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:23, 21 December 2019 (UTC)