Talk:Loveland Living Planet Aquarium

Multiple issues

Posting this here since Elisfkc did not create a section. Why is this tagged with "primary sources" issues? There are four reliable sources establishing the notability. Beyond establishing that, the best source for information on exhibits and happenings at the aquarium is the aquarium itself. Rather than tag it, how about going through the four third-party sources and finding where else they can be used in the article? Drive-by taggings are not usually that helpful. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:29, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Because out of the 11 references, 7 of them are from the aquarium themselves. It's just a notice on the page, not a deletion nomination. --Elisfkc (talk) 23:35, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Elisfkc: Did I say it was a deletion nomination? I don't see where I said anything about that. Please don't imply this is about something it's not. As I said, it makes sense that most of the facts about the aquarium are from the aquarium itself. Once notability has been established, there is nothing which says that primary sources can't be used. Again, why don't you try fixing things instead of doing a driving-by tagging? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:26, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, I miscounted. Five of the references are from third-party reliable sources, so only six of them are from the aquarium. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:28, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, but still, a majority of them are from the aquarium, hence the primary sources tag. Elisfkc (talk) 01:57, 22 June 2017 (UTC)