Talk:Bristol Renaissance Faire

This article was nominated for deletion on August 28, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Wisconsin Low‑importance

	Wisconsin portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Festivals

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Festivals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Festivals 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.FestivalsWikipedia:WikiProject FestivalsTemplate:WikiProject FestivalsFestivals
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Reenactment (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reenactment, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ReenactmentWikipedia:WikiProject ReenactmentTemplate:WikiProject ReenactmentReenactment

Military history

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

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 met

Additional information:
/
	No existing task force includes this article in its scope; to propose a new one, please leave a message on the main project talk page.

Start

Hi!

I am working on creating the article. I was surprised to see it wasn't already here. I'm trying to get a lot of research together for the next few hours and start writing heavily later tonight. This isn't to say no one else should add, of course, just know I'll be working intently on it the next few days! Liastnir 01:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, nothing has shown up yet. I added some history, but it is personal, subjective, and really should be dealt with by someone more knowledgeable. Artemis-Arethusa 02:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm going to add some information, but this is my first Wikipedia edit so please feel free to change anything or give me advice. Thanks! Aribug (talk) 04:45, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edits and reversion

Julie McMillin here - R.E.P. online community manager. I've edited the dates for the history of Bristol to reflect what we have in the office, and I'm updating the in-house acting groups that have been with the faire longer than 2 years. The Stage Acts change yearly and would be very difficult to update. However, the in-house groups have added to the history of Bristol for many years and should be included in a review of Bristol such as this.

If you have any evidence or sources that my information is inaccurate I'd be MORE than happy to review it. Bristol has been around for more than 20 years. I'd like to do her justice in her article.

Thank you in advance! Julie McMillin (talk) 20:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julie. First, you should read the Wikipedia guidelines on conflicts of interest. Since you work for REP, you're supposed to avoid editing on articles like this.

I also just made a really, really heavy reversion edit on the grounds that this article was basically one huge advertisement for Bristol. This article is supposed to talk about Bristol as neutrally as possible, and more importantly, to do so using reliable sources. In a nutshell, reliable sources are secondary sources about the topic - newspaper articles and the like. By comparison, the text that was here used links to Facebook and Google Docs as references, neither of which are acceptable as they are unverifiable. There is also no reason for this article to have a breakdown of historical and fantasy groups, especially when the text in each section was getting really intricate and was excessive for a Wiki article.

Sorry to be a little heavy handed like this, but it was just way too much. I'm willing to discuss the reinclusion of some of that text as long as there's a reason for it. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 21:26, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it was a needed reversion. It looks as though none of the legitimately cited information was lost. cmadler (talk) 21:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I support the reversion too. --Baron Larf 08:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 15:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to stir the pot too much here, but I have some concerns about what sounds to me like bias or just outright incorrect statements in the history section. as a former cast member from the late eighties, I can say there has always been a conflict over Historical accuracy. there were always, even to this day, patrons dressing up as fantastical creatures and characters. to my knowledge, the only intentional, by management, inaccuracy was the inclusion of elves which were never given performance space or billing. similar characters exist at BRF today. while brevity should always be the order of the day here, there is a great deal missing concerning the history of this faire and it's contributions to the renfaires across the country today. I, However like Ms McMillin above, should be a source, not an editor. I do propose that the references to historical Accuracy be removed. in their current form it suggests that this contributed to some sort of decline, something better left to a chat board. as a piece of constructive assistance, here is a link regarding history from the faire's earliest days to 1989 and may expand on the Shapiro's reasons for sale which isn't alluded to in this page

I would love to work with someone to expand this and related articles. http://www.leagle.com/decision/19891663714FSupp949_11505.xml/LEONARDO'S,%20INC.%20v.%20GREATHALL,%20LTD. --Quidamn(Quidamn) 14:15, 7 September 2016 (CDT)

Event recreation

I've been to this faire several times and was never aware that it was supposed to be recreating a specific historical event. Is this fact actually presented to visitors? Tad Lincoln (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bristol Renaissance Faire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]