![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thank you for your recent edits to the Abergavenny article but I have reverted them for several reasons. You added a Points of Interest section to the article. This is basically a Trivia section that must be avoided in articles. Things like the festivals can be added to the culture section, but 'things on' are unencyclopedic and will be deleted. Bullet points in the lead are also to be avoided, in fact bulletpoints in general are to be avoided. As an encyclopaedia we need to make sure that we add facts that would appear in an encyclopaedia in prose style. Have a look at some GA Wales articles such as Milford Haven, Rhondda and Wales to aid you in your editing. Don't give up, I wasn't being mean on purpose, much of your information is valid, it just needs refining. FruitMonkey ( talk) 22:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Offa's Dyke is the name of long distance pathways in Monmouthshire. From what I've read (outside of Coxe who just hints at it), they date back to Pre-Roman times as evidenced through archaelogical evidence + connect the historical pathways. One of the sources that I read liked described taking the Offa Dyke pathways to taking a historical journey. So, I thought, ok - I'll keep that term. Just my reasoning - I hear why the term isn't encyclopedic.
When I first started trying to improve acticls by providing citations I realized what was really needed was a re-write. Which I even better understood after reading your and FruitMonkey's comments. I just think that trying to improve articles is not as much fun as I hoped. It's confusing for me when the entire article is reverted.
...And at this point I will step in. I've been watching this for a while now. C, the issue may be that there is one source (Coxe) who talks of towns and a lot of other sources which refer to the habitation as something else. In that situation, the majority is likely to "win" - consensus makes them more reliable as sources.
G, I must admit that you do come across sometimes as being a little bit terse. I'm sure that you do not mean it but I'm sure also you are aware of WP:BITE. Your explanations are informative to someone who knows nowt, like me, but also a bit daunting.
Both of you, it will all look different in 12-24 hours time. - Sitush ( talk) 11:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I may be getting confused with my Gwladys's. Thought the number of Jones, Hughes etc was excessive but to find multiple Gwladys has come as a bit of a shock. <g>
I've done some preliminary work on the Gwladys_ferch_Dafydd_Gam article, by way of a review. Inevitably, it is critical ... but do not despair. Here are the comments, so far. Feel free to question them.
Here endeth the lesson. I'm going back to the Gwladys_ferch_Dafydd_Gam article now, to nitpick some more :) - Sitush ( talk) 02:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
CaroleHenson ( talk) 05:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding IBSN's Ghmyrtle and Sitush, I love Open Library (thanks Sitush), but I'm not sure what of the numbers would be an IBSN. Do you know? Open Library OL23346359M LC Control Number 03017060 OCLC/WorldCat 13012228 CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
OCLC13012228 is Tales & Sketches - published 1879, which is way before isbn numbers came in. Use the oclc number in the citation instead of isbn. Thus "|oclc=13012228". There are some notes for you on the article talk page. - Sitush ( talk) 19:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
16:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
The broad-ish range of options you can use when citing a book are:
{{cite book |last1= |first1= |authorlink1= |last2= |first2= |editor1-first= |editor1-last= |editor1-link= |others= |title= |url= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |year= |month= |origyear= |publisher= |location= |language= |isbn= |oclc= |doi= |id= |page= |pages= |chapter= |chapterurl= |quote= |ref= |bibcode= |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp=}}
See Template:cite book for usage
For a web page (not a book website, but something like the Monastic Wales place), you can choose from:
{{cite web |first= |last= |author= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |url= |archiveurl= |work= |publisher= |location= |page= |pages= |language= |format= |doi= |date= |month= |year= |archivedate= |accessdate= |quote= }}
I'm fairly sure there are others options for these particular templates, but I've never had need to use them. - Sitush ( talk) 20:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!!! -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 20:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I note that you have added a back link from at least one article to your own. You should go to Sir Richard Herbert and something will smack you right in the face. You have the info to change a sentence there. I could do it, but it's good practice for you. - Sitush ( talk) 20:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
You are seeing the benefits of a couple of Cambridge University history degrees. Had no use for them for years and all of a sudden ... Anyway, I'm going for a beer, having been awake now for 36 hours or so. Catch ya later. - Sitush ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Do not use FamilySearch as a source - it is grossly unreliable. You will have to edit it out manually - if you use "undo" then intermediate edits will be lost also. - Sitush ( talk) 12:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No probs. NB: I've double-checked after your comment above and it seems that it was not you who added the FamilySearch citation - [ [1]]. Sorry about that. I made an assumption based on the number of edits around the time + that you are a newbie. I'd still argue strongly against using such sources. - Sitush ( talk) 17:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
And a thought: read WP:SPS, taking note of the phrase "user generated". As far as I am concerned, pretty much all genealogy sites are "user generated". There are exceptions but often in those cases they would fail one or other different WP tests. I've often been intrigued by www.thepeerage.com, which I strongly suspect is reliable because it seems to be a cataloguing exercise based on standard texts such as Debrett - it certainly could help someone find the actual source for something. - Sitush ( talk) 17:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I moved your page Gwladys ferch Dafydd (disambiguation) to Gwladys ferch Dafydd (disambiguation) as this is, hopefully, more likely to be found by people looking for either Gwladys. As it stood it sounded like a wiki version of Tokyo Rose. NtheP ( talk) 18:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
In answer to your question on my talk page, yes - put {{Other persons|Gwladys ferch Dafydd}} at the top of each article page. NtheP ( talk) 18:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
next question, are there more Gwladys on here that we don't know about? NtheP ( talk) 10:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
20:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Not sure if this is from a person or an automated response, but yes I realize I forget it sometimes. I'm working on remembering consistently.-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 20:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, been a bit busy but am back. Will take a look at yr Gwladys stuff soon. Not that you need me as I see plenty of other ppl have been weighing in.-- Sitush ( talk) 03:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Why is there a need for an article on Sir Roger Vaughan of Bredwardine separate from the article on his wife Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam, especially since the Sir Roger article duplicates verbatim content from the Gwladys article? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
For all that you have accomplished in the short while you've been here!-- Jeanne Boleyn ( talk) 16:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC) |
Thank you, Jeanne!!! It's been great working with - and learning from you!-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 22:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Shining Star (Phrase) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shining Star (Phrase) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I have reviewed your article as you requested on Wikipedia:Editor review/CaroleHenson, and I am pleased to tell you that it meets the expansion criteria for being featured on the Main Page as a DYK! (You can see the page for my comments, including on how to nominate it.) If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me or anybody else! Reaper Eternal ( talk) 21:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 17 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that legend says that Welsh noblewoman Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam was so beloved that when she died 3000 knights, nobles and weeping peasants followed her body to its burial place? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 12:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 25 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sir Richard Herbert, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Sir Richard Herbert was the illegitimate son of William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, and Maud, daughter of Adam ap Howell Graunt? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
"How do" is a well-worn phrase used in Lancashire and Yorkshire for "how are you doing?", "hello" etc. Best said by dropping the "h" and sometimes elongating the "o" of "do" - 'ow doo. That's your bit of trivia for the day.<g>
Now to matters wikipedia. I've been keeping an eye on things you have been editing of late and am really impressed. Enthusiastic new editors are ten-a-penny but those that can combine their enthusiasm with a willingness to learn about how this whole she-bang works, and to collaborate with others, are a bit less common. You appear to be one of the less common. Good stuff.
Just by way of encouragement, you've had some DYKs (more than me) but things can go further. I've edited a lot more than you but have not really been active here since much before January ... and I've just taken an article to Good Article status with a suggestion that it should be a Featured Article. Not blowing my own trumpet - this would not have happened without a lot of help from the community - but it does demonstrate that we who have become active recently can make a difference. So, keep doing what you are doing - it is appreciated. - Sitush ( talk) 02:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Sheer stupidity, my good sir/ma'am. I do apologize. Names are hard to think of ( talk) 07:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
--Whew! Thanks for the folllow-up! -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 07:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
This is an automated message. Your
editor review is scheduled to be closed on 16 March 2011 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive-->
to the review page will prevent further automated actions.
AnomieBOT
⚡
17:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Responded to your question on my talkpage, keep up your good work... Modernist ( talk) 05:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give
Agostina Segatori Sitting in the Café du Tabourin a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. nancy 15:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carole, I was doing some maintenance on a novel article I have and with clicking through links ended up at Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam which seems to be one of yours. I just wanted you to know that I left a message and some questions there on the talkpage about the sourcing. Take care. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 19:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It wasn't completely altruistic though as many of the fishermen did earn a tidy sum ferrying all those people over the Danish/Swedish sea... Just a thought that could be added. Bug42
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thank you for your recent edits to the Abergavenny article but I have reverted them for several reasons. You added a Points of Interest section to the article. This is basically a Trivia section that must be avoided in articles. Things like the festivals can be added to the culture section, but 'things on' are unencyclopedic and will be deleted. Bullet points in the lead are also to be avoided, in fact bulletpoints in general are to be avoided. As an encyclopaedia we need to make sure that we add facts that would appear in an encyclopaedia in prose style. Have a look at some GA Wales articles such as Milford Haven, Rhondda and Wales to aid you in your editing. Don't give up, I wasn't being mean on purpose, much of your information is valid, it just needs refining. FruitMonkey ( talk) 22:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Offa's Dyke is the name of long distance pathways in Monmouthshire. From what I've read (outside of Coxe who just hints at it), they date back to Pre-Roman times as evidenced through archaelogical evidence + connect the historical pathways. One of the sources that I read liked described taking the Offa Dyke pathways to taking a historical journey. So, I thought, ok - I'll keep that term. Just my reasoning - I hear why the term isn't encyclopedic.
When I first started trying to improve acticls by providing citations I realized what was really needed was a re-write. Which I even better understood after reading your and FruitMonkey's comments. I just think that trying to improve articles is not as much fun as I hoped. It's confusing for me when the entire article is reverted.
...And at this point I will step in. I've been watching this for a while now. C, the issue may be that there is one source (Coxe) who talks of towns and a lot of other sources which refer to the habitation as something else. In that situation, the majority is likely to "win" - consensus makes them more reliable as sources.
G, I must admit that you do come across sometimes as being a little bit terse. I'm sure that you do not mean it but I'm sure also you are aware of WP:BITE. Your explanations are informative to someone who knows nowt, like me, but also a bit daunting.
Both of you, it will all look different in 12-24 hours time. - Sitush ( talk) 11:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I may be getting confused with my Gwladys's. Thought the number of Jones, Hughes etc was excessive but to find multiple Gwladys has come as a bit of a shock. <g>
I've done some preliminary work on the Gwladys_ferch_Dafydd_Gam article, by way of a review. Inevitably, it is critical ... but do not despair. Here are the comments, so far. Feel free to question them.
Here endeth the lesson. I'm going back to the Gwladys_ferch_Dafydd_Gam article now, to nitpick some more :) - Sitush ( talk) 02:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
CaroleHenson ( talk) 05:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding IBSN's Ghmyrtle and Sitush, I love Open Library (thanks Sitush), but I'm not sure what of the numbers would be an IBSN. Do you know? Open Library OL23346359M LC Control Number 03017060 OCLC/WorldCat 13012228 CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
OCLC13012228 is Tales & Sketches - published 1879, which is way before isbn numbers came in. Use the oclc number in the citation instead of isbn. Thus "|oclc=13012228". There are some notes for you on the article talk page. - Sitush ( talk) 19:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
16:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
The broad-ish range of options you can use when citing a book are:
{{cite book |last1= |first1= |authorlink1= |last2= |first2= |editor1-first= |editor1-last= |editor1-link= |others= |title= |url= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |year= |month= |origyear= |publisher= |location= |language= |isbn= |oclc= |doi= |id= |page= |pages= |chapter= |chapterurl= |quote= |ref= |bibcode= |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp=}}
See Template:cite book for usage
For a web page (not a book website, but something like the Monastic Wales place), you can choose from:
{{cite web |first= |last= |author= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |url= |archiveurl= |work= |publisher= |location= |page= |pages= |language= |format= |doi= |date= |month= |year= |archivedate= |accessdate= |quote= }}
I'm fairly sure there are others options for these particular templates, but I've never had need to use them. - Sitush ( talk) 20:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!!! -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 20:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I note that you have added a back link from at least one article to your own. You should go to Sir Richard Herbert and something will smack you right in the face. You have the info to change a sentence there. I could do it, but it's good practice for you. - Sitush ( talk) 20:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
You are seeing the benefits of a couple of Cambridge University history degrees. Had no use for them for years and all of a sudden ... Anyway, I'm going for a beer, having been awake now for 36 hours or so. Catch ya later. - Sitush ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Do not use FamilySearch as a source - it is grossly unreliable. You will have to edit it out manually - if you use "undo" then intermediate edits will be lost also. - Sitush ( talk) 12:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No probs. NB: I've double-checked after your comment above and it seems that it was not you who added the FamilySearch citation - [ [1]]. Sorry about that. I made an assumption based on the number of edits around the time + that you are a newbie. I'd still argue strongly against using such sources. - Sitush ( talk) 17:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
And a thought: read WP:SPS, taking note of the phrase "user generated". As far as I am concerned, pretty much all genealogy sites are "user generated". There are exceptions but often in those cases they would fail one or other different WP tests. I've often been intrigued by www.thepeerage.com, which I strongly suspect is reliable because it seems to be a cataloguing exercise based on standard texts such as Debrett - it certainly could help someone find the actual source for something. - Sitush ( talk) 17:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I moved your page Gwladys ferch Dafydd (disambiguation) to Gwladys ferch Dafydd (disambiguation) as this is, hopefully, more likely to be found by people looking for either Gwladys. As it stood it sounded like a wiki version of Tokyo Rose. NtheP ( talk) 18:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
In answer to your question on my talk page, yes - put {{Other persons|Gwladys ferch Dafydd}} at the top of each article page. NtheP ( talk) 18:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
next question, are there more Gwladys on here that we don't know about? NtheP ( talk) 10:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk)
20:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Not sure if this is from a person or an automated response, but yes I realize I forget it sometimes. I'm working on remembering consistently.-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 20:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, been a bit busy but am back. Will take a look at yr Gwladys stuff soon. Not that you need me as I see plenty of other ppl have been weighing in.-- Sitush ( talk) 03:05, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Why is there a need for an article on Sir Roger Vaughan of Bredwardine separate from the article on his wife Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam, especially since the Sir Roger article duplicates verbatim content from the Gwladys article? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 16:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Special Barnstar | |
For all that you have accomplished in the short while you've been here!-- Jeanne Boleyn ( talk) 16:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC) |
Thank you, Jeanne!!! It's been great working with - and learning from you!-- CaroleHenson ( talk) 22:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Shining Star (Phrase) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shining Star (Phrase) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 21:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I have reviewed your article as you requested on Wikipedia:Editor review/CaroleHenson, and I am pleased to tell you that it meets the expansion criteria for being featured on the Main Page as a DYK! (You can see the page for my comments, including on how to nominate it.) If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me or anybody else! Reaper Eternal ( talk) 21:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 17 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that legend says that Welsh noblewoman Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam was so beloved that when she died 3000 knights, nobles and weeping peasants followed her body to its burial place? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 12:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 25 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sir Richard Herbert, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Sir Richard Herbert was the illegitimate son of William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, and Maud, daughter of Adam ap Howell Graunt? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
"How do" is a well-worn phrase used in Lancashire and Yorkshire for "how are you doing?", "hello" etc. Best said by dropping the "h" and sometimes elongating the "o" of "do" - 'ow doo. That's your bit of trivia for the day.<g>
Now to matters wikipedia. I've been keeping an eye on things you have been editing of late and am really impressed. Enthusiastic new editors are ten-a-penny but those that can combine their enthusiasm with a willingness to learn about how this whole she-bang works, and to collaborate with others, are a bit less common. You appear to be one of the less common. Good stuff.
Just by way of encouragement, you've had some DYKs (more than me) but things can go further. I've edited a lot more than you but have not really been active here since much before January ... and I've just taken an article to Good Article status with a suggestion that it should be a Featured Article. Not blowing my own trumpet - this would not have happened without a lot of help from the community - but it does demonstrate that we who have become active recently can make a difference. So, keep doing what you are doing - it is appreciated. - Sitush ( talk) 02:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Sheer stupidity, my good sir/ma'am. I do apologize. Names are hard to think of ( talk) 07:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
--Whew! Thanks for the folllow-up! -- CaroleHenson ( talk) 07:25, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
This is an automated message. Your
editor review is scheduled to be closed on 16 March 2011 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive-->
to the review page will prevent further automated actions.
AnomieBOT
⚡
17:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Responded to your question on my talkpage, keep up your good work... Modernist ( talk) 05:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give
Agostina Segatori Sitting in the Café du Tabourin a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "
cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the
page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. nancy 15:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carole, I was doing some maintenance on a novel article I have and with clicking through links ended up at Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam which seems to be one of yours. I just wanted you to know that I left a message and some questions there on the talkpage about the sourcing. Take care. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 19:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It wasn't completely altruistic though as many of the fishermen did earn a tidy sum ferrying all those people over the Danish/Swedish sea... Just a thought that could be added. Bug42