Talk:Jumping stilts

This article was nominated for deletion on 2nd June 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

this article needs a massive overhaul. theres huge pieces of copied text and nothing is cited or referenced. I trimmed the external links as it was a huge cache of advertising. If anyone can find some RELEVANT external links, please add them. --Endlessrain 14:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The external links are still dominated by advertising, removing them has no effect they are quickly replaced. Is there a way of banning a specific link?Martin Cordon 17:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Why is this called Poweriser? It doesn't mention or explain the term at all. If it is a brand name, this should be moved to Category:Shoe brands. Bards 22:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poweriser is a brand name but it is also used, at the moment, generically to refer to all jumping stilts of this type in a similar manner to the connection between Hoover and Vacuum Cleaners. Hence the title. It is unfortunate that at the moment this article is slanted towards the Poweriser brand. More information on competing brands and a neutral point of view is needed. I would also like to thank the anonymous editor who removed the Learned Opinion. Martin Cordon 15:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poweriser is a brand name but it is sold by several different manufacturers.Xkixs 23:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move, cleanup

Article cleaned up and moved. A great deal of the content and links were entirely inappropriate. Always makes me smile to see the "please don't remove my link" hidden messages. WP:EL covers that one... Deiz talk 04:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Deiz, the external links area was a disaster zone before. --77.99.43.181 21:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Jumping stilts here

It seems unnecessary to have two articles on the same topic, especially as this one is already mostly about the stilts themselves, and it makes sense to cover the activity and the stilts in the same article. Basil Richards 19:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with the proposal. Would also tone down the bias. Currently it seems written more in the style of a sales pitch for a toy than a purely informative article Tobermory 13:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]