User talk:Plucas58/Archive 1

Speedy deletion nomination of File:St James Breightmet.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:St James Breightmet.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ww2censor (talk) 17:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:St James Breightmet.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:St James Breightmet.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 18:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Layout

Hi, I have some informations for you: per Wikipedia:Layout#Standard_appendices_and_footers succession boxes are always located below the references/external links section and above the category section. Additionally per Wikipedia:Dates#Dates we use no ordinal suffixes. Note also that per MOS:TIES#Strong_national_ties_to_a_topic we use that version of English in biographies, that the article's subject speaks or has spoken for themself ... thus at articles about British peers you should also use British English. Best wishes ~~ Phoe _talk ~~ 22:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Two articles about Elizabeth

Hello Plucas58. Should Elizabeth Willoughby, 3th Baroness Willoughby de Broke to be (speedy) deleted (if that are possible) and only on article will be existing? --Diwas (talk) 00:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Careful

Compare Thomas Pope Blount, 1st Baronet Blount and Thomas Blount, 1st Baronet Blount. Hm? DS (talk) 15:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Charles Molyneux, 1st Earl of Sefton

Hi. Do you have a source for "Maria Leversy"? Debrett's says her name was "Mary Levery". Road Wizard (talk) 12:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josceline Bagot

A tag has been placed on Josceline Bagot requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jarkeld (talk) 01:11, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I tagged the article on 14 Februari and removed the tag ON THE SAME DAY when you added/rephrased the article. The start of this article was a copyvio and as such the tagging was correct at that time. Jarkeld (talk) 22:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Joseph T. Carew

A tag has been placed on Joseph T. Carew requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Alexius08 (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Jocelyn Bagot was a Member of Parliament and senior public servant. The article was written in my own words and has numerous references. What do you want - blood???? Joseph Carew was founder of a large store. Why have you not queried the notability of Frank Woolworth???

Peter Lucas Plucas58 (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Henry Grey, 3rd Earl of Stamford

Because his status through right of birth is completely irrelevant to his importance? Does he pass WP:BIO? No; the only sources discussing him are general things like Debrett's. Does he pass any of the sub-categories? No, because he did nothing important except live. Ironholds (talk) 13:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm neither an anarchist nor a member of the thought police. Have you considered that personal attacks may not be the best way to resolve a debate? A pop star made and sold a record which sold hundreds of thousands or millions of copies. A professional footballer demonstrates athletic prowess and, more importantly, coverage by reliable sources. Henry Grey's sole achievement, wait for it, was... being born. Ironholds (talk) 14:07, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The fact is, merely holding a nobility title and/or being descendant from a famous person is not an automatic source of notability. Notability is not inherited. Descendents of Winston Churchill, to take an example generally have articles from being notable in their own right (in fact, having just noticed Diana Churchill, I'll probably nominate it now), not from being descendants of a famous politician. Apart from holding a title, the person in question does not appear to have anything to make himself stand out, hence the redirect. What little information there is could be kept in the title article. Circéus (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I can simply reply with this. It is a long-standing position that simply being a member of the nobility is not sufficient notability; they must have done something. If a peer is recorded as sitting in Parliament, and did something notable, fine. If not, they don't get an article; they get a redirect to the article on the peerage. Wikipedia is not there to document "lesser-known" members of society; our entire notability guideline is based on the principle that figures must be covered by reliable, third-party sources to be notable. Ironholds (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Richard Dixon (scientist)

Thanks for your expansion to this article; additions should, however, be based on sourcing, which you haven't provided. Ironholds (talk) 17:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Medical lectures

Hello there - it is nice to see someone taking an interest in the medical lecture series. I wanted to mention that the many references to Dictionary of National Biography articles may in some cases be filled in now, because ongoing work at Wikisource is creating numerous DNB articles (coming up to 20% done now). I found a couple immediately for Lumleian Lectures ‎. Also, for verifying the older lecturers, the DNB and the current ODNB website are good sources, and I suppose various gaps can be filled by using them. Could you use edit summaries more often? It is mostly a confidence-building thing. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The Working Man's Barnstar

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For your tireless work on List of Fellows of the Royal Society, i just created the list mess, but you are chipping away mercilessly, at the disambiguations Pohick2 (talk) 21:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

no trouble at all - however, be careful if you look at the original source, [1] there are many foreign born people who are called "Fellows", not "Foreign Members". i'm too confused to argue about it. Pohick2 (talk) 12:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

i see that members of commonwealth nations are not "foreigners" Pohick2 (talk) 13:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

i've been thinking of List of Fellows of the Royal Society. could delete, but could also use as disambig for complete lists, with "really notable" nobel prize winners, Newton, Priestley etc. whadda ya think? Pohick2 (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

ok i did my rearranging, cutting there, restoring to before i began my "improvements"; change it if you don't like, there's plenty of room to add some names if people come along. Pohick2 (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

good work, but since any FRS is by definition "notable", i was searching for a "super-notable" sobriquet.Pohick2 (talk) 13:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Malcolm Ferguson-Smith

The article Malcolm Ferguson-Smith has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

BLP article with few references.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 20:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Spitsbergen

Hi. Just so you know, next time you should use the Dutch spelling Spitsbergen, and not the German spelling Spitzbergen, which shouldn't be used when writing in English. The island was discovered by the Dutch after all. Jonas Poole (talk) 01:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Richard Grosvenor, 1st Earl Grosvenor

You have added a category to this article saying that he was a Fellow of the Royal Society. I can find no evidence of this; nor indeed that he was any sort of scientist. There is no reference to his being a FRS in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Can you tell me where you obtained this information, with full reference details? If you cannot, I shall have to delete the category. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Similarly Thomas Lawrence. --Old Moonraker (talk) 12:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the ref: I can reinstate this now. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Done.--Old Moonraker (talk) 13:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thomas Oldham

If you look at the bottom of the Category:Royal Medal Winners page[2] you will see that it's a sub-category of Category:Royal Society, so that doesn't need to go on as well—it's just a technicality. More important is the point that there shouldn't be any categories that haven't already been introduced in the text, and these should be referenced. As WP:BOP puts it: The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material (bold as in original). --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Dermatology

Any interest in dermatology? If so, we are always looking for more help at the Dermatology task force, particularly with the ongoing Bolognia push. I can e-mail you the login information if you like? There is still a lot of potential for many new articles and redirects. Just let me know. ---kilbad (talk) 18:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

New DNB WikiProject

For information: I have set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography, since the time has certainly come when there should be a place for collective discussion of the DNB adaptation effort. Please come and participate. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Wenman

I will go ahead and change Thomas Francis Wenman to indicate that he was a Fellow of the Royal Society rather than of the Society of Antiquaries of London. In addition to the dating you observed, the list of subscribers in John Gutch's Collecteana curiosa records him with the postnominal of "FRS" only, whereas members of the Society of Antiquaries, including those who were FRS (such as Bp. Vyse) are given the postnominal "FAS". As he also appears in other contemporary documents without the antiquarian postnominal when it is used by others, I think this constitutes sufficient grounds to deem this an error of the DNB. Choess (talk) 23:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Sir George Orby Wombwell, 4th Baronet

I have moved the page to Sir George Orby Wombwell, 4th Baronet since the creator of the page, User:Boleyn, says she won't object to the move. I can only assume the original reference with the Grey name must have been a mistake. Thanks for pointing this out. —Soap— 16:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Charles Hotham (rector)

added information to the article Charles Hotham (rector) that is not covered by the current citations. Please add a citation for the additional information. It may well be covered by the DNB article but only the DNBIE is currently cited as no one has yet copied over the additional information and cited it. -- PBS (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for adding an external link to the references section however what is needed is a inline citation. You can find out how to do these using the guideline WP:CITE. However in the case of the DNB we have a lot of the text already on s:wikisource and in this case there was a box on the right of the references section as is displayed to the right of this paragraph.

We have also developed some templates to help editors quickly format DNB entires. In this case to format your entry {{cite DNB |title=Hotham, Charles (1615-1672?) |url=http://www.archive.org/stream/dictionarynatio25stepgoog#page/n424/mode/1up}} fills out lots of the details:

•  "Hotham, Charles (1615-1672?)". Dictionary of National Biography. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1900.

If you know the source is available on wikisource then {{cite DNB |wstitle=Hotham, Charles (1615-1672?)}} is all that is needed:

• "Hotham, Charles (1615-1672?)" . Dictionary of National Biography. London: Smith, Elder & Co. 1885–1900.

If you copy some text from a copyright expired text link the DNB or EB1911, then you should attribute the work (see WP:Plagarism#Public-domain sources, We have templates to help with that as well see {{DNB}} and {{1911}} (you will find many more in Category:Attribution templates).

Both DNB templates take other parameters such as volume and page numbers, and you will find them described in the template documentation see {{cite DNB}} and {{DNB}}. I'll reformat the citations in the Charles Hotham (rector) article so that you can see a practical demonstration of what I have described here. -- PBS (talk) 20:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

En dash

I noticed that in your recent additions to List of inventions named after people, you used hyphens where the format calls for en dashes. If you don't know how to type an en dash, you can copy and paste one from another line. Or use the editting help buttons below the edit box to insert one; or if you're on a Mac, type option-hyphen. Can you fix it please? Dicklyon (talk) 01:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

K.B. and coronation year

This edit of the article Francis Fane (royalist) has thrown up an inconsistency in the sources. The coronation of Charles I was not 1661 that was the coronation year of Charles II. I think we need another independent source to confirm which of the two given sources is correct. -- PBS (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Philip

The DNB is clear that it was Francis Fane (dramatist) who was knighted at the 1661 coronation of King Cheles II. I have made a few changes and need to make more to clarify this and other issues, e.g. the Francis Fane (dramatist) article didn't even link back to his father's article (it does now). My only interest in all this was a bit of casual disambiguation for some light relief. Plucas58 (talk) 20:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The reason why Francis Fane (dramatist) does not link in Francis Fane (royalist) is because I wrote the dramatist article a couple of days before the royalist article and forgot to put in the back link. The Grandfather of the dramatist was also a Francis Fane and he received a K.B at the coronation of James I, so although it makes sense for one for each generation at the coronations of J.I, C.I, C.II, we can not out of hand dismiss the possibility that the son and grandson received their K.Bs. at the coronation of Charles II (as one of the sources you found says so).

As to the ejection by the Royal Society, either that source is confused by three generations with the same name (and it was the grandson (the dramatist) who was the member, or the 1682 is someone confusing the Julian start of year (if he died between January 1 and March 24 he could have been expelled just before his death which could have been registered as 1681 although that would usually be written as happening in the year 1682). The DNB sometimes made that sort of error so I checked the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography that confirms the dates in the DNB:

"Fane, Sir Francis (d. 1691), playwright, was the eldest son of Sir Francis Fane (d. 1680), of Fulbeck, Lincolnshire, and Elizabeth, widow of John Darcy and daughter of William West, of Firbeck, Yorkshire. He was the grandson of Mildmay Fane, second earl of Westmorland. ..."

So it seems that the 1682 was either for the Dramatist or is wrong. But the ODNB throws up another problem. It suggests that the Royalist was either not the father of the Dramatist or that the Royalist was the son of the second earl and not a younger son of the first earl. -- So much to check .... -- PBS (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Sloppy editting

When you add stuff to List of inventions named after people and other articles, please try to be consistent with the style. That means using en dash, not hyphen, and using proper capitalization. I'm going to revert anotker batch of your changes so you can fix them. And please don't add thing like biscuits just because they have names on them; these are not really inventions per se. Dicklyon (talk) 20:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

This sort of comment might carry a little more weight if it didn't have typos itself. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Point taken; but being sloppy on a talk page is a different deal than on an article.

See Dash#Common dashes for how to enter the en dash etc. Again, the point is to be consistent with the existing style, not to rewrite it arbitrarily for your own convenience. Dicklyon (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

You also entered the wrong inventor name for the Zamboni again; please be careful. Dicklyon (talk) 21:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Charles Galton Darwin

Hello, your re-shuffle and re-sectioning makes a big improvement on the readability of the article (to my opinion). Best regards, Crowsnest (talk) 14:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

John Bellers

Thanks for your addition to, and correction of, the John Bellers article. Much appreciated. FrenchieAlexandre (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Royal Astronomical Society

Good job with the current, and former notable presidents list in this article. It is a good idea (imho). Thanks. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

William Ashburnham (royalist)

If you split a paragraph as you did with this edit. Please check the sources and add the appropriate citation to the earlier paragraphs. Rather than adding "typo" to the edit history, If you make such changes in future please make a more detailed summary.

Please do not add unreliable sources as you did with this edit to the notes section. If you wish to add a reliable source to an article but it is not used as an in-line citation, then please add it to a "Further reading" section and reserve Notes and References to those sources that are cited. -- PBS (talk) 12:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

Your addition to Alexander Cave has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Some text was directly copied from here, while other parts were very closely paraphrased. Please be more careful. Airplaneman ✈ 17:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Fred Brown (virologist)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Fred Brown (virologist), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.warmwell.com/fredbrownobitindy.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Middlesborough > Middlesbrough

Hi there. With regard to your recent editing on the local nature reserves, I thought you might like to know that it's Middlesbrough rather than Middlesborough if you want the English town! Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk)

Don't be sorry, no worries! Cheers DBaK (talk) 13:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Robert Willoughby, 1st Baron Willoughby de Broke

Just over a year ago you created a number of pages such as Robert Willoughby, 1st Baron Willoughby de Broke what did you use for a source? Please reply either on my talk page or the talk page of the article.-- PBS (talk) 12:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page and you contribution. I have tracked down the pages and added them from those websites. Are those the only web pages you used or did you also another source? I asked this because some of the information you have provided (such as the DOB 1452) is not on either page, and the year he was summoned (you have added to the article 1492, while Lundy is silent and Leigh Rayment writes "12 Aug 1491") is not the same as that in the sources. PBS (talk) 08:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Robert Willoughby, 1st Baron Willoughby de Broke#Discrepancies -- PBS (talk) 09:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I do no think that websites that carry no citations, (unless the author or is a reliable source -- eg an academic expert on the subject) can be considered reliable. If in the case of Lundy were he cites his sources (which he does for many entries) then I do not see a problem with taking information from his site and citing him citing his sources (WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT).

With regards to you comments about LM, I am sorry if her tone offended you. There is a the thread about the issue sh raised: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage#Baron Latymer and Baron Latimer. She has a point about your contributions from that date not carrying citations, and it would help clarify that issue if you were to go through the articles you created around the time you created Robert Willoughby retro-fitting full in-line citations. -- PBS (talk) 20:58, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of people from Kirklees

A tag has been placed on List of people from Kirklees, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DIRECTORY#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Phearson (talk) 23:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of people from Bradford

A tag has been placed on List of people from Bradford, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DIRECTORY#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Phearson (talk) 23:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

List of people from Kirklees

Hi. I've changed the heading levels in List of people from Kirklees again, as articles, including lists, start with level 2 headings by convention, eg List of superheroines. (If there are subdivisions at level 2, eg by profession, individual starting letters would then be at level 3). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

contradictory (erroneous) information for High Sheriff of Leicestershire

Leics.gov.uk and the London Gazette give contradictory information for 1882. There is also conflicting information for 1880. I've edited the article to reflect this (with citations), but the resulting situation is unsatisfactory.

It may be that http://www.leics.gov.uk/index/your_council/about_leicestershire/leicestershire_lieutenancy_index/leicestershire_lieutenancy_high_sheriff.htm, which is apparently the basis for many of the entries here, is unreliable.

Perhaps it would be possible to look at another "High Sheriff" article, with extensive citations from London Gazette for each year, to find the correct list for Leicestershire. It might be a fair bit of work, though. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 21:50, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what to think, except: the National Archives.gov.uk page is a catalogue of archived documents; it is not the documents themselves. It is theoretically possible that the webmaster (or archivists) could have miscatalogued the documents. Whereas, the London Gazette announcement is a direct contemporary announcement (and then there is the other, seemingly knowledgeable mini-biography about Winterton which says 1880 for him). It is worth looking at the London Gazette announcements for other years. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 22:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for taking the time. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Albert Craig

Thanks for providing his date of birth, which I hadn't been able to find. To satisfy my curiosity, could you tell me where you found it? JH (talk page) 16:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! JH (talk page) 08:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

tomorrow

Ive no idea where you are but I keep seeing your edits. Are you too far away for this? It seems to cover your interests as judged by edits Ive seen? Victuallers (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

High Sheriff of Warwickshire

Help. I've recently been updating the article on Sewallis Shirley (MP) and the Peerage has him as HS of Warwickshire for 1884, but the current list does not list him at all. Do you know which is correct? Thanks in advance FruitMonkey (talk) 09:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I can throw some light: the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography has him High Sheriff in 1884, but of County Monaghan. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

This description from County Families does not mention either:

SHIRLEY, Capt. Evelyn Charles, of Ettington Park, Warwickshire ; and of Lough Fea, aud Shirley House, co. Monaghan. Only son of Sewallis Evelyn Shirley, Esq., M.P., .J.P. and D.L., of Ettington Park, and of Lough Fea, and Shirley House, who d. 1904, by Emily Jean, who (1 1918, elder dau. of the late Col. William Macdonald Colijuhoun-Farquharson-Macdonald, J.P.and D.L.,of St. Martin's Abbey, Perthshire; b. 1889. Capt. Shirley, who was educated at Eton and at Ch. Ch., Oxford (B.A. 1911), is a Magistrate for oo. Monaghan ( High Sheriff 1914), Capt. Warwickshire Yeo., Lord of the Manor of Ettington, and Patron of 2 livings. —h'.ttington Park, Straiford-on-Avon ; Lough Fea, Cai-rickmacross, co. Monaglian. Plucas58 (talk) 10:04, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Diolch, I'll update the article with the information. FruitMonkey (talk) 17:15, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Peidiwch â sôn Plucas58 (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Evelyn Shirley (1812–1882)

Have you got the dates of metriculation right? Perhaps you meant a century earlier? Acabashi (talk) 19:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, ColcloughBaronets

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, ColcloughBaronets. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Colclough Baronets. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Colclough Baronets - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. নাফী ম. সাধ nafSadh^{talk | contribs} 10:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Royal Society awards

Hi Plucas58. Just to let you know we've substantially changed the way the medals, awards and prize lectures are displayed on http://royalsociety.org/awards - hopefully this will make it easier to maintain these pages on wikipedia too. Any questions (or if you spot any mistakes our side), please let me know. Cheers, --Andeggs (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

List of High Sheriffs of Somerset

Hi, I noticed your edits to List of High Sheriffs of Somerset. I've done some more on it in the last 24 hrs renaming the article (as lists are supposed to have list in the title), adding more detail, changing the layout of sections and expanding the lead. Could you take a look. In particular, although I've added wikilinks for some of the individuals which I knew had articles, I have not searched for articles to link for most of them.— Rod ^talk 17:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - sorry about Amias Paulet I should have checked the dates.— Rod ^talk 20:08, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

William Tailboys

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of William Tailboys, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://xpda.com/family/Tailboys-Walter-ind29533.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Additional information needs citations

I have noticed that you have made edits to several articles which I watch,(such as this one) but you have not added any in-line citations from reliable sources to support the additional information. Please could you do so.

Also looking at the article William Tailboys that is mentioned in the section preceding this one, you have included a general reference, but the paragraphs need in-line citations to pages in the general reference (see the WP:CITE for guideline for how to do this). -- PBS (talk) 20:17, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

With this edit to the article Robert Tichborne you have again made a change to an article without providing a source. As the sentence was already sourced the change implies that the information was contained within that source. Please stop making changes to articles without providing sources for those changes. Presumably you are using a reliable source for the information that "In 1651 Tichborne was a Sheriff of the City of London" so why not add the source to the article? If you have not got a reliable source then the information should not be added (See WP:V)-- PBS (talk) 21:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

"High Sheriff"

As you're now going through and changing back to this usage... you should know that in the Anglo-Norman and Angevin period the office wasn't titled "High Sheriff" it was plain "sheriff" and the sources support that usage. I'm fine with linking to the "high sheriff" articles but it's wrong to have the title as "High Sheriff of Foo" - the piped links are correct for this time period. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Edward North, 1st Baron North.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Edward North, 1st Baron North.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

John Bramston, the younger

I reversed this edit (Revision as of 20:21, 18 August 2011).

Why did you remove the lead? The lead was constructed from the Concise Dictionary of National Biography "An epitome of the supplement 1901–1911". London: Smith, Elder. p. 1. {{cite web}}: External link in |title= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help) and as such is an summary of the DNB article which is what the rest of the article is based upon.

Please see WP:LEAD the first paragraph "The lead serves both as an introduction to the article and as a summary of its most important aspects." It would seem to me that a lead based on the Concise Dictionary of National Biography is a summary of the artiles most important aspects.

The next point is that copying the name of the father down into the text is fine, but the rest of the changes shows that you did not carefully read the article before making the changes. He could not have been elected to the Long Parliament in 1660, that is your misreading of the lead the sentence "The son of Sir John Bramston, the elder, he was educated at Wadham College, Oxford, and called to bar at Middle Temple in 1635." does not mean that he was "educated at Wadham College, Oxford, and called to bar at Middle Temple" all in the year 1635. Similarly "Elected to the Long Parliament, and knighted (K.B.) in 1660." does not mean both happened in the same year.

If you had read the article carefully you would have seen this sentence "Elected for Bodmin to the Long Parliament, he, on his father's advice, he sold his chambers in the Temple on the outbreak of the Civil War, he removed with his family to his father's house at Skreens." in the Civil War and Interregnum section. As a member for Bodmin he was not a knight of the shire but he was knighted K.B. in 1660 as is mentioned in the section After the Restoration.

Also you added "He left an autobiography (published 1845)." to the section After the Restoration yet if you had read on you would have seen that this is covered a section called "Bibliography". -- PBS (talk) 00:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it the DNB is not always right and this is a case where it is not:

His first venture into politics had been an abortive attempt to enter parliament at the second 1640 general election as a burgess for Bodmin, Cornwall. A double return led to his petition to the committee of privilege, which accepted his contention that he received ‘the popularity of the major part of the select number’ (Autobiography, 160), but this finding was never reported to the house. Instead, John Pym's nephew, Anthony Nicholl, held the seat from 1641 to about 1648. This and his father's impeachment nurtured the Bramstons' ‘malignancy’ towards the parliamentary and army leadership.

— Thomas M. Coakley ODNB

However 1660-1661 was not the Long Parliament but as the article says the Convention Parliament the DNB does not record his sitting in the Cavalier Parliament which is recorded in the ODNB "Bramston entered parliament as knight of the shire for Essex in 1660 at the top of the poll, and returned in 1661, apparently for the second seat." I'll update this information to the article. -- PBS (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

List of Sheriffs of London

I see you have done a very good job on the article List of Sheriffs of London. I have been going through standardising the citations as much as I could. I decided that as you had started off using:

• Noorthouck, John (1773). "Addenda: The Mayors and Sheriffs of London (to 1773)". A New History of London: Including Westminster and Southwark. pp. 889–893. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

It would be easy to add citations to the earlier centuries. However the dates from 1189 to 1460 are one away from those that Noorthouck uses. Is this a transcription error or an intentional change? I ask this because no other source in the reference section seems to cover the period as thoroughly and the Revision as of 17:20, 27 July 2011, left two trailing years out of sequence which are still on the page:

• 1270 William Haddystoke, Anketyll de Alverne
• 1299 John de Stordforde, William de Stortforde

I have not gone a head and changed any of the dates as it is not clear to me if the current arrangement was intentional. -- PBS (talk) 09:39, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I missed you previous posting to my page and concentrated on the most recent.

You wrote on my page

The date shift was intentional as every other reference seemed to be a year earlier than my source. But if it such a change is unethical it can be changed back.

and

The two out of sequence records (1270 and 1299) were there already but not listed in my source.

Unless you can provide the sources that you used and they are reliable, then we should go with the reliable source that you provided on the page (verifiability). -- PBS (talk) 06:21, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I've done some research on line and now have several other sources we can look at. I have put the information onto the talk page of the article so we can have a more public discussion, please see Talk:List of Sheriffs of London#Earliest centuries and see what you think, your comments would be much appreciated. -- PBS (talk) 14:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I have done some further research on List of Sheriffs of London please have a look at Talk:List of Sheriffs of London and see what you think. Your comments would be much appreciated. -- PBS (talk)

Random survey

Hi, This is a random survey regarding the first sentence on the Wikipedia policy page Verifiability.

"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true."

In your own words, what does this mean? Thank you. Regards, Bob K31416 (talk) 19:16, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Edward Fitton (the younger)

With this series of edit you have added new facts to a page and a general reference, but please see WP:UNSOURCED, as before your edit everything was supported with inline citations now it is not. Please alter your edit so that ever sentence is covered by an inline citation. This includes new information and sentences now split over two paragraphs where the first paragraph no longer has a citation to support it. -- PBS (talk) 11:28, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

You recently added information to Sir Gilbert Gerard, 1st Baronet of Harrow on the Hill and added a general reference. Please also add inline citations as you do it because retrofitting them is difficult. Please check my edit and make sure that I have included an inline citation for all your additions. Also how do you know he was high sheriff (because the source you added says simply states "sheriff, Bucks. 1626-7;")? PBS (talk)-- 10:41, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I had already looked at the article High Sheriff of Buckinghamshire (and its sources) and so I had already noticed the citation that you have since added to Sir Gilbert Gerard, 1st Baronet of Harrow on the Hill. I had also looked at some of the other sources, but they all seemed to state "Sheriff" and not "High Sheriff". I did not look through all the The Oxford Gazettes, but did look at the first one The Oxford Gazette: no. 1. p. 1. 7 Nov 1665. That Gazette seemed to me a good place to look, as those type of publications seemed to go for verbose mode when it can to offices and titles (just look after the names of the men appointed to be Sheriffs ) and it too uses the term "Sheriff" not "High Sheriff". This being so I do not think we can use the title of a Wikipedia article as a source. Is there an article or a source that explains when the term "High Sheriff" came into/out of use? -- PBS (talk) 23:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for you reply. I am sorry I must be very dense, so please bare with me. What source contains the list are your referring to that explicitly says it was High Sheriffs and not just Sheriffs? I ask because to date all the sources on the High Sheriff of Buckinghamshire for that period refer to "Sheriff" not to "High Sheriff". I see in the list of High Sheriff of Buckinghamshire that all the reports in the London Gazette (that I have sampled) up to and including 1973 refer to "Sheriff" while all the reports in the London Gazette (that I have sampled) from 1974 onwards refer to "High Sheriff". I presume that there must have been a change in naming between 1973 and 1974 do you have a source that can explain the discrepancy and verify that before 1974 the position was in fact "High Sheriff" even though the London Gazette as sourced in the article describes them as "Sheriff"?

I did a Google search on High Sheriff and saw this page [3], but that does not mean that the term High Sheriff was used prior to 1974 just that the office existed. For example the High Sheriff says "The appointments and duties of the high sheriffs in England and Wales are laid down by the Sheriffs Act 1887." but the Wikipedia article on Sheriffs Act 1887 talk about "Sheriffs" not high Sheriffs as does the UK legislation website Sheriffs Act 1887.

[Google searches lots of time looking .... ] OK I've found it the Local Government Act 1972 Government Act 1972: Section 219 "Sheriffs appointed for a county or Greater London shall be known as high sheriffs, and any reference in any enactment or instrument to a sheriff shall be construed accordingly in relation to sheriffs for a county or Greater London." Give the legislation time to get through Parliament and Royal assent (the legislation came into effect on 1 April 1974) and Bobs your uncle that explains why before 1974 they were sheriffs and since they are high sheriffs. I would prefer not to use primary source, but the secondary sources such as the usage in the London Gazette seem to support this change of name.

So unless there is a sources that contradicts the sources we have I suggest that we stay with the term Sheriff unless there is a sources that explicitly uses the term high sheriff. -- PBS (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough - We can use the term Sheriff prior to 1974 and High Sheriff thereafter. I will have a look at the article on High Sheriffs and add details of your discovery re the 1972 act (if you haven't already done it), I will amend Edward fitton article accordingly but use of the phrase High Sheriff is widespread in Wikipedia articles.Plucas58 (talk) 14:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll leave it to you ;-) These 10 dozen articles that need amendment popped up today, and I seem to have sort of volunteered to sort out the mess (not quite sure how I ended up with the job!). So good luck and if you find you need any help please let me know. -- PBS (talk) 14:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Preston constituency

Hey Plucas. Thanks for the added extras to the Preston article. doktorb _words^deeds 15:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Plucas58! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Thomas Thorpe (Speaker of the House of Commons), you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Battle of Northampton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Sir Hugh Pollard, 2nd Baronet, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Category (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Parr (d.1461)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Thomas Parr (d.1461), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.stepneyrobarts.co.uk/14833.htm.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I have edited the article to remove some text which appeared to be too close a paraphrase of the copyright text at the website identified by CorenSearchBot above. From the copyright info on that website, it appears that permission might be granted to use the text if needed. Information on how to do this can be found at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.--CharlieDelta (talk) 00:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)-

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Henry Bourchier, 1st Earl of Essex, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of St Albans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Henry Long (1435)

Hi. You blanked Henry Long (1435) without an explanation, and I have reverted. Brambleclawx 20:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Records of members of parliament of the United Kingdom, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Whig, James Walker and Richard Fort (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Records of members of parliament of the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rev (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading free images/media such as File:Trelech Village.jpg to Wikipedia! As you may know, there is another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please upload media there instead (see m:Help:Unified login). That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view previous uploads by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'file' namespace from the drop down box (or see [4]). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading! Multichill (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Amazing work adding all those new MPs. A really useful contribution to Wikipedia, that's helped me make several of them into articles. Boleyn (talk) 09:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited High Sheriff of Northamptonshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Parr (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited List of Archdeacons of York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Marsh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bishop of Derry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Barnard

Bishop of Raphoe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Barnard

Dean of Chester (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Barlow

List of Deans of St Paul's (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William May

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of Archdeacons of Norfolk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Philip Morgan

List of Archdeacons of Suffolk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hélie de Talleyrand-Périgord

List of Archdeacons of West Ham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Archbishop of Sydney

List of Deans of Durham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Robert Horne

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

If you add information to Wikipedia articles please add inline citations

You added "holding the deanery in commendam until 1622." to Michael Boyle (bishop of Waterford and Lismore). Please provide a inline citation for that addition. -- PBS (talk) 20:56, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Archdeacon of Totnes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to George Carew

Dean of Cashel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Chappell

Dean of Lismore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Michael Boyle

Dean of Tuam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Orr

Dean of Waterford (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Peter Barrett

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Dean of Armagh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Diocese of Armagh

Dean of Connor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Diocese of Connor

Dean of Derry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to George Stone

Dean of Raphoe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Arthur Smith

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Dean of Llandaff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Lewis

King Edward VI School (Bury St Edmunds) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Fenn

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, ForMemRS

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, ForMemRS. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Foreign Member of the Royal Society. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Foreign Member of the Royal Society - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Zad68 (talk) 23:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

List of Archdeacons of Canterbury

Do you have a source for Peter of Blois as Archdeacon of Canterbury? This appointment is not mentioned in R.W. Southern's long account of his career in the OBND. DavidShaw (talk) 13:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The source for my (possibly arguable) belief that Peter de Blois was archdeacon of Canterbury came fro the source http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=34351. Let me know what you think. I will defer to your greater knowledge of the subject. Plucas58 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Your reference to the Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicamae is for Peter as Archdeacon of Bath, about which there is no doubt. He is not listed as Archdeacon of Canterbury in the volume for Canterbury: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=33855. As he was such a prolific letter writer, it is unlikely that he would fail to mention a post at Canterbury -- he was quite a pluralist. I think it would be best to delete the entry, especially as it has no dates. DavidShaw (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. When you recently edited Bishop of Peterborough, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bishop of Edmonton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Peter Mansfield

Hi Plucas58, I saw your edits to Sir Ps page, and it reminded me I had started work on this article in my userspace, but never copied it forward to main. I've dumped in the information I have - it's very rough around the edges, but is hopefully useful. I don't have much wikitime at the moment - if you do have time, please knock my edits into shape. I don't think I've stomped on your recent edits, but if I did, it was unintened - please forgive me and revert mercilessly! GyroMagician (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Kohn Award

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kohn Award, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://royalsociety.org/awards/kohn-award.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Kohn Award

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Kohn Award, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://royalsociety.org/awards/kohn-award. As a copyright violation, Kohn Award appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Kohn Award has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Kohn Award and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Kohn Award with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Kohn Award.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 21:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Kohn Award

Hi Plucas58, you recently removed a deletion tag from Kohn Award. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Your addition to Kohn Award has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I see a page with way too many copyright violation notices here--and now another one. After over two years here you should know better. Please consider this a final warning. Drmies (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Plucas58. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 16:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Drmies (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Johann Georg Liebknecht (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Leopoldina

List of Fellows of the Royal Society D,E,F (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Alun Davies

Milner Award (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Leopoldina

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Herbert Orpen

The article John Herbert Orpen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence that he meets WP:BIO, no reliable independent sources in the article, and the only reliable source I could find was "Crockford's clerical directory", which is insufficient. The 10 distinct Google hits returned by the search " "John Herbert Orpen" edmundsbury -wikipedia " are not very promising either.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 10:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Arthur Herbert Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to KCVO

Walter Elliot (Scottish naturalist) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Star of India

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

826 Naval Air Squadron

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 826 Naval Air Squadron, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Squadrons/826.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem: 826 Naval Air Squadron

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as 826 Naval Air Squadron, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Squadrons/826.html, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:826 Naval Air Squadron and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, 826 Naval Air Squadron, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:826 Naval Air Squadron with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:826 Naval Air Squadron. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:826 Naval Air Squadron saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! CharlieDelta (talk) 18:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

You must be jokingPlucas58 (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

826 Naval Air Squadron

If it is any consolation, I think that the proposed copyright infringemnet is complete nonsense and that the Copyright bot nead a very short leash attached to it.Petebutt (talk) 20:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I also wanted to state, as I did on madmans talk page, that the bot frequently makes mistakes. Way too frequently. 138.162.8.57 (talk) 15:11, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Nele Loring (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Battle of Poitiers and Siege of Calais

Reginald de Cobham, 1st Baron Cobham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Battle of Poitiers

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing

Hi. I'm afraid the 822 Naval Air Squadron article you contributed to has parts which are very closely paraphrased from [5]. This can be a problem under both our copyright policies and our guideline on plagiarism.

While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation – including both structure and language – are. For an example of close paraphrasing, consider the following: The source says:

At Ulunderpet, Southern India the squadron joined 11th Naval TBR Wing and from Katukurunda embarked on HMS Victorious with 21 aircraft for a strike on 18 September 1944 on a railway target at Sigli, Sumatra.

The article says:

At Ulunderpet, the squadron joined 11th Naval TBR Wing and embarked on HMS Victorious with 21 aircraft for a strike on 18 September 1944 on a railway target at Sigli, Sumatra.

Every word in your sentence has been copied from the original, with some of the surrounding text omitted.

The source says:

In January 1945 the squadron joined RAF Coastal Command for anti-submarine operations in the English Channel, being re-equipped with 12 Barracuda IIs in June 1945...

The article says:

In January 1945 the squadron was allocated to RAF Coastal Command for anti-submarine operations in the English Channel after being re-equipped with 12 Barracuda IIs in June 1945.

I've bolded precise copying. Your sentence deviates from the original by only a few words.

These are examples; there are other passages that follow quite closely.

As a website that is widely read and reused, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously to protect the interests of the holders of copyright as well as those of the Wikimedia Foundation and our reusers. Wikipedia's copyright policies require that the content we take from non-free sources, aside from brief and clearly marked quotations, be rewritten from scratch. So that we can be sure it does not constitute a derivative work, this article should be revised to separate it further from its source. The essay Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism".

Please let me know if you have questions about this. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:35, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Dean and Canons of Windsor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Edward Legge

List of Archdeacons of Berkshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to James Randall

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. When you recently edited Troyes Cathedral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philip of Burgundy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Edward Coke

Hey :). this edit lacked citations; could you please provide some? Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 14:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Rufford Old Hall - Great Hall screen

Hi Plucas. My 2007 NT guidebook, by Richard Dean, does not even tell us it is made of oak. I wonder could you confirm that Pevsner has bog oak, or else which is your source? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I am watching your page here, so it's easier to converse, in one place. (Also, could you try and reply on any editors "Talk page" and not their "User page", thanks!) You said: "The very knowleagable guides will tell you that the screen is made of bog oak. It also has a carving of a six-fingered hand, reputed to represent Anne Boleyn." Well, that may well be true. But if you want to add anything on Wikipedia, you have to provide a reliable source. I assume that Pevsner does not tell us that it is bog oak. So do you have an actual source that you can quote for that article? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

It's encouraging to see that you have now added the word "reputedly". But we are still left with the question - "reputed by whom?" By Plucas58? By someone Plucas58 has read? By a man down the pub? Even with a reliable source, we might need to add "reputedly". But so far we still have no source(s) at all. It seems that it was a Nicholas Sanders who suggested, in 1586, that the late Anne Boleyn had six fingers on her right hand. The fact that such a carving appears on the screen might be more noteworthy than the material being bog oak. But is there any source for that carving on the screen? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The carving is certainly on the screen and certainly is a carving of a woman and certainly has six fingers. I have seen it several times and always point it out to anyone who cares to listen. Again I only have the word of the guides that it possibly represents Anne Boleyn. Another interesting feature of the carving is that the lower left panel is different to the rest, apparently to avoid a God-challenging perfection. I will take some photos on my next visit. Plucas58 (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I don't doubt all you say is true. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is concerned more with verifiability than with truth. Just because you, or I, see something with our own eyes, and even take a picture of it, does not mean it can necessarily then be included in a Wikipeidia article - it counts as WP:OR. Also, sorry to convey more bad news, but before you take any photos to upload here (as I have myself have done on numerous occasions) you may wish to read the note I have left at Talk:Gawthorpe Hall#File:Gawthorpe new.jpg to appear as POTD soon about the POTD image. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Photography is specifically allowed in the Great Hall at Rufford, although possibly not for publication. Plucas58 (talk) 20:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's allowed in most NT properties. But none of it is meant to be published. If you want to take a photo of the six fingured hand and send it to me, I'd be fascinated to see it. But what do you want to do about the claims in the article? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:17, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I've undone the change. Life is too short to argue. Plucas58 (talk) 21:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you are very wise to do that. I certainly don't want an argument. But life is also too short not to debate a little! And sincere thanks for raising these interesting topics. Do you think we should copy anything here to Talk:Rufford Old Hall? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe we could ask if anyone has an acceptable source re the bog oak and Anne Boleyn claims made by the National Trust guides Plucas58 (talk) 21:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

An excellent idea. I have started a thread. Please feel free to add, if necessary. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Visiting the hall again today I had a look at the printed material in the Great Hall and had a chat with the room guide. The printed leaflet says quite clearly that the screen is made of bog oak, although no actual primary source to support that claim is provided. But this was also very positively confirmed by the lady guide herself. She also told me that it was carved, in situ, from one piece of bog oak and is so large and heavy that it must have been made at the same time that the hall was constructed - it would be extremely difficult to lift and there are no doors or windows that would have afforded a sufficiently wide entry point. She claimed also that the wood was so dense that it would not burn in a house fire, but only char.

I quizzed her also about Anne Boleyn (who was married to Henny VIII at about the same time the house was being built). She pointed out to me the six fingers, which in fact belong to the right hand of a female heraldic angel holding a shield, together with two other deliberate mistakes. She was quite adamant that the hand did not represent Anne. The mistakes are explained in the printed material thus: "There are three mistakes visible on the screen. It was a common belief during Medieval and Tudor times that God alone could make something perfect. For men to do the same was heresy, as this would indicate they were as good as God. To avoid committing this serious crime (punishable by burning at the stake), mistakes were included within the work, or added as it was finished. Look carefully to spot the mistakes on the screen: 1. one panel on the Hall side is upside down, 2. one panel in the dining room side is a completely different pattern to all the others, 3. the angel carved on the dining room side has an extra finger on one hand."

Additionally, I was told that it was unclear if the three spiral finials at the top of the screen were carved from the same piece of wood or were added later. Contemporary drawings show the piece complete, but the finials may have been made by another craftsman (they are incredibly intricate) and added at the same time. The design of the finials is thought to be unique and its inspiration or possible meaning is unclear. (Note: the NT Guidebook makes it quite clear that the screen is made of separate pieces, so the in-situ thesis may be mistaken).

I'm not sure how much, if any of this could be added to the article. But now that I have seen the "bog oak" description in a printed National Trust document in the room, I think it can safely be added. (I have taken a few photos, including one of the angel, but of course I can't publish them here). Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

BRD: Archdeacon of Wilts

You boldly changed the Wilts link on List of archdeacons in the Church of England to Wiltshire. I have reverted you with good reason. The next step is that we discuss – you should not have then reverted me (so I will return the page to the status quo while we discuss). Did you not think my rationale for the status quo was good enough? If so, why not? DBD 10:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand your rationale at all. Why do you not want to link an entry in your table to the article on the Archdeacons of Wiltshire?

Plucas58 (talk) 13:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

My rationale is that in recent official sources, the current preference is for "Archdeacon of Wilts" over "Archdeacon of Wiltshire". cf: diocesan website, John Wraw's appointment as Bishop, etc. I've made some moves and edits to reflect that now. DBD 14:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

That seems the best solution-my only concern was the link to the article, not the name of the article itself.Plucas58 (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Archdeacon of Westminster

If I'm honest, I'm not completely sure what her role entails, but I'm reasonably sure it's not a lot like most archdeacons. Particularly, I've removed one particularly heinous piece of misinformation – the three Westminster deaneries are in London diocese's Archdeaconry of Charing Cross, so they are under the archidiaconal oversight of the Archdeacon of Charing Cross (and the direct episcopal oversight of Chartres himself – for the moment). DBD 20:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for putting me straight. I have found a definition of the current archdeacon's role in some conference notes.Plucas58 (talk) 22:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Archdeacon of Ludlow for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Archdeacon of Ludlow is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archdeacon of Ludlow 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 high-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. Taroaldo (talk) 22:52, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Holy Barnstar!

	The Holy Barnstar
	I,  The Steve , hereby award you a Holy Barnstar for your contributions to wikipedia, particularly those about archdeacons and related articles 06:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - but the job's not finished yet. Lost momentum due to the Ludlow case concerning which I should thank you for your support.Plucas58 (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Haha no worries. WP should be a hobby, and there's no deadline. I'm a slow contributor myself. I was looking over your contribs, and was impressed by your interest and knowledge of such things.  The Steve  06:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Archdeacon of Chesterfield (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bishop of Johannesburg

Corday–Morgan Medal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lee Cronin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16

Hi. When you recently edited Henry Isley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Harper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)