Talk:Mathew Baynton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

references[edit]

There is no source for the date of birth given or for parent's names or domestic partner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbityman (talkcontribs) 12:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. I've removed or hidden that which is presently unverifiable. --Ibn (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


There is also no source for the information about being born in Leeds and moving to London or his age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbityman (talkcontribs) 09:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this content as well. --Chris (talk) 11:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Matportrait2593556.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Matportrait2593556.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 19 November 2011[edit]

Please change Mathew Baynton's Date Of Birth from November 26th to November 18th, as November 18th is Mathew's actual birthday. Jiminiwick (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. CTJF83 22:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date[edit]

Please do not keep changing the birth date without giving a strong source. See WP:RS. Thank you. Span (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Please do not put children's names in infobox"?[edit]

I'm frankly a bit confused. The article has been purged of any mention of Baynton's son's name, with the above rationale... which links to an essay that is apparently designed to avoid harassment of Wiki users. As far as I can tell it has nothing to do with article subjects, let alone their children. (Not to mention that the most recently deleted material wasn't even in the infobox to begin with.)

Even if I'm missing some connexion there (likely), what possible issue of this kind could there be with simply including the child's name, when it's demonstrably a matter of public record? His father uses it quite freely on Twitter etc, and it's used in the sourced article. Shoebox2 (talk) 13:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: have now found what I think is the actual policy in question, at WP:BLPNAME. Still not sure if I agree in this case, but will refrain from re-adding the name accordingly until more relevance is obtained. :) Shoebox2 (talk) 13:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Shoebox2 for providing the more accurate wikilink. I appreciate your diligence.
I am only following a policy which seems widespread on biography articles of living people. Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 13:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]