This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In response to an email received regarding recent changes to the article, which indicated that the changes were "made at the request of" the owners, I would say, firstly, that their contributions are most welcome. However, they do not have a veto on the article's content, any more than the subject of a biographical article has a veto over that article's content. Secondly, it would be worth reading our guidance on editing with a conflict of interest, which is here, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. The material regarding the court case accurately summarised the case and was sourced to the impeccable BAILLI website. In relation to the images in the Gallery, these can certainly be replaced if they are outdated, but it would be better not to remove them until replacements are available. I'd be pleased to offer further help/guidance as required. Just drop me a line here, or on my Talkpage. KJP1 ( talk) 16:27, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Wyndcliffe Court was used in 2018 for the filming of the BBC TV series The Victorian House of Arts and Crafts (broadcast in 2019). It's mentioned in this blog, and there's a reference to the filming in this agenda - but we could use a more reliable source. (Incidentally, Wyndcliffe Court is not a "Victorian House"...). Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
MelStewWales, Tissington - Mel, welcome back to Wikipedia and Tissington, welcome. I thought it might help if I explained a little more about how Wikipedia works. A key point is that nobody owns any article on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Wikipedia works in a collaborative way. Thus, you can't make an arbitrary and unilateral decision that content is "no longer relevant" as Tissington did earlier. That's for the community to decide. If you want something removed, you should make the case for removal here, on the article's Talkpage. Secondly, you need to be careful of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you have an interest in the article subject in real life, e.g. you work for the owners or even if you are the owner, that doesn't give you any more rights over the article than anyone else. Indeed it imposes a particular obligation to edit in a careful and neutral way. If you just remove sourced content because you don't like it, you will likely see another editor put it back, as I will now do. You removed important, sourced details regarding the history of the house, and the recent court case. Both are entirely relevant to the overall history of the house. If you end up Wikipedia:Edit warring over this, rather than having a discussion, you could find your access is restricted. I hope this is helpful and would be pleased to advise further if you have any specific queries. Regards. KJP1 ( talk) 18:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In response to an email received regarding recent changes to the article, which indicated that the changes were "made at the request of" the owners, I would say, firstly, that their contributions are most welcome. However, they do not have a veto on the article's content, any more than the subject of a biographical article has a veto over that article's content. Secondly, it would be worth reading our guidance on editing with a conflict of interest, which is here, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. The material regarding the court case accurately summarised the case and was sourced to the impeccable BAILLI website. In relation to the images in the Gallery, these can certainly be replaced if they are outdated, but it would be better not to remove them until replacements are available. I'd be pleased to offer further help/guidance as required. Just drop me a line here, or on my Talkpage. KJP1 ( talk) 16:27, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Wyndcliffe Court was used in 2018 for the filming of the BBC TV series The Victorian House of Arts and Crafts (broadcast in 2019). It's mentioned in this blog, and there's a reference to the filming in this agenda - but we could use a more reliable source. (Incidentally, Wyndcliffe Court is not a "Victorian House"...). Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
MelStewWales, Tissington - Mel, welcome back to Wikipedia and Tissington, welcome. I thought it might help if I explained a little more about how Wikipedia works. A key point is that nobody owns any article on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Wikipedia works in a collaborative way. Thus, you can't make an arbitrary and unilateral decision that content is "no longer relevant" as Tissington did earlier. That's for the community to decide. If you want something removed, you should make the case for removal here, on the article's Talkpage. Secondly, you need to be careful of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you have an interest in the article subject in real life, e.g. you work for the owners or even if you are the owner, that doesn't give you any more rights over the article than anyone else. Indeed it imposes a particular obligation to edit in a careful and neutral way. If you just remove sourced content because you don't like it, you will likely see another editor put it back, as I will now do. You removed important, sourced details regarding the history of the house, and the recent court case. Both are entirely relevant to the overall history of the house. If you end up Wikipedia:Edit warring over this, rather than having a discussion, you could find your access is restricted. I hope this is helpful and would be pleased to advise further if you have any specific queries. Regards. KJP1 ( talk) 18:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)