User talk:SovalValtos/Archives/2023/December

Fernhurst

You have just reverted my hard work improving the Fernhurst entry. If you had be more attentive you would have seen that I had started to reference the new entries. One was complete and inserted for Hannah Whitall Smith and the second on Robert Pearsall Smith was being inputted when I saw your message, informing that you had chosen to delete. They were all people who had wikipedia entries so notoriety is not an issue. The article on Fernhurst is weak and in the Start-category. I have the knowledge to improve it. What I propose to do is complete my work on this section in the sandbox and re-submit. I trust this is acceptable. I request that you take more time before such further actions to see if they are justifiable. Dorkinglad (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Dorkinglad I am pleased you want to improve the Fernhurst article. The normal procedure when adding new material is to cite a source at the same time rather than wait until later. Both Smiths, Onslow and Rickman had articles so I do not dispute that they are notable even though you are confusing notability with notoriety! Please could you give the actual page numbers in 'The Land of Lod' rather than a range? Attentively.SovalValtos (talk) 09:15, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I can although the reference section will have four references of the same source.There are two chapters on Fernhurrst and parish which I have high-lighted. I was following normal procedure and in the process of referencing. I feel you were too zealous in your actions. I’ ve written many articles over many years including GA articles. Loads more to do so I will re reference for you and move elsewhere. Dorkinglad (talk) 11:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I have referenced as you requested. Perhaps you could ask someone from your contacts to work on this article and improve it from start status. The originator has merely bookmarked the entry and doesn't seem to have cross-referenced facts. I am not a fan of Anthony Salvin who lived in Fernhurst . His renovations to our ancient churchs were, in my opinion that of an iconoclast. I'm not the first person to feel this way and his renovation of St Margaret of Antioch (not St Margaret of Scotland or England) was criticised in his life-time. The expansion of the section on St Margaret's should include more on the rennovations. There needs to be a linked reference to the crash of Iberia Flight 062 that happened within the parish boundaries (the article is about the Parish)and to Fernhurst in the World Wars when the village received many refugees. It is true you can walk up Blackdown from The Red Lion but it is by no means the only route up the south side. I've done most of them over the years. Further notable people who lived in the parish include members of the Strachey family (a few have Wikipedia entries) and writer Arthur Ponsonby. Consideration , perhaps could be given to the proposals, ultimately unfulfilled to build a railway from Haslemere to Midhurst and on to Chicester (Midhust to Chichester was built) as this had consequences on the development of Fernhurst and on this part of Sussex which is lovely and relatively unspoilt. Maybe you could encourage The Fernhurst Society to work on the Wikipedia page. I don't know how active they are these days. Why not try to improve the article yourself sir? I offer these suggestions in good faith and wish you all success in your endeavours to improve this article.Dorkinglad (talk) 12:02, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Pembroke Dock

You have just deleted my new section on Pembroke Docks for notable people. You say: "Associations not cited, some not even in linked articles". The people listed were selected from Category:People from Pembroke Dock and were all born in the town. I don't see your problem. Please reconsider and reinstate. ArbieP (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Please use the article talk page for discussing its content rather than mine ArbieP. WP:V requires sourcing so a problem with your addition is that you did not provide that. Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. Looking forward to seeing you add reliable sources WP:RS for them all being born in the town as you assert. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 20:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The people listed as born in [Pembroke Dock] have wikipages of their own, which is where their birthplace is provided. Their wikipages usually provide references / citations too for outstanding achievements or contentious issues in their lives, and for any notable quotations they might have made. The latter three items are amongst the themes of "WP:RS". "WP:RS" does not require a source for every sentence, which is somewhat over the top and would paralyse Wikipedia. On reflection I hope you may agree that on this occasion you've gone a little too far in deleting [Notable people] in [Pembroke Dock] and will re-instate it, please. ArbieP (talk) 10:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Alleged puffery

Dear Dock, I got to understand your point, please review it now. Thanks Anhop (talk) 10:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Per cent vs percent

Hello!

I just wanted to say that I very rarely see "percent" written in esteemed publications except as direct quotations or proper names. The Telegraph's website returns a staggering 317,000 results for "per cent", but only returns 14,600 for "percent". I am not sure whether it is "acceptable" or merely "tolerated". 𝔖𝔱𝔬𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔷 (talk) 13:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

The Sky VIP Official Big Top 40 from Global

I have reverted your edits on the page because you deleted 2 parts from "Records and statistics" that people wanted to see. I have been a fan of that show since it started on Capital and Heart in 2009, i even have a Spotify playlist dedicated to it. Jac Clow (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Jac Clow I am pleased you enjoy being a fan of a radio show. Wikipedia does not include content just because you think that readers want to see it. Wikipedia policy is that all content must be attributable to reliable, published sources WP:V.SovalValtos (talk) 16:02, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

people want to know what radio stations broadcast the show so do not remove it any further. they might want to have a look. Jac Clow (talk) 13:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

William Adams locomotives

A bit puzzled that you have restored your citation request with the comment "Wikipedia is not a reliable source". Well, in itself it is not, but each of the pages linked contains a reference to a reliable primary source. So it is surely obvious that there are 5 preserved engines (now that I have provided direct links to the relevant pages). After all, if Wikipedia with its references is not a reliable source, then why do we contribute to it? Hyperman 42 (talk) 23:01, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Likewise with the request for citation from the two engines I've mentioned; yes, these references could be provided, but they are immediately available in the wikipages on the two locomotives which are just one click away. So it would seem that providing references on every page where something appears merely clutters up the reference list unnecessarily. Hyperman 42 (talk) 23:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I actually found a direct reference for the info stated in the original CN so I have added that; I agree that is better. Have therefore deleted that CN, hope that is OK. Have left the second (new) CN in place to see your answer on the point made immediately above.Hyperman 42 (talk) 00:00, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Hyperman 42 thank you for your addition of a citation in the William Adams (locomotive engineer) article for the date of being in 'full working order and operational'. I do not have a copy of the book in my library so have been unable to read it so far. However I see that the book was published in September 2023 so cannot be used to assert an October status. It might be best if you were to correct the text tense and date rather than me. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 04:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

I do not agree Hyperman 42 that 'providing references on every page where something appears merely clutters up the reference list unnecessarily'. I would prefer to have cited sources in each article rather than having to go on a voyage of exploration through other articles. See WP:BURDEN WP:V I am content to contribute to Wikipedia even with it not being a reliable source. I have made some corrections that I suggested you did to William Adams (locomotive engineer) as it has been several days now. Using the present tense in article text can be problematic. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 20:15, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

I would disagree with your interpretation of WP:BURDEN. That only states 4 specific cases where inline citations are required, generally for contentious areas, and do not seem to apply here. We may have to disagree on what number of references to provide, as it is a matter of personal preference, but I don't regard one extra click as a "voyage of discovery". It seems to me that Wikipedia articles as a whole take a balanced view between providing direct references where needed and allowing cross-references to other pages, and are more readable as a result. Hyperman 42 (talk) 22:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the citation for the T3, I think you have misread the citation and introduced an error as a result. The Woodhams reference was specifically to the O2, and that is why it is placed after that statement. It did not refer to the T3. I agree that this needs a citation here or elsewhere and have left your request in place; now that the engine is in full operation, it will be possible to add one. However the October 2023 date was correct as the T3 did not haul its first trains until 7 October, so I am reverting this. Hyperman 42 (talk) 22:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I have now also added a direct citation on the page for the T3's return to steam on 7/8 October 2023. Hopefully that is OK with you and you will now be happy to remove the citation request. Hyperman 42 (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

It has also stimulated me to find two references from the BBC website that are more likely to have long-term durability, so that has been helpful - thanks. Hyperman 42 (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hyperman 42 the place to discuss William Adams (locomotive engineer)'s content is the article's talk page, not here. Please transfer the discussion there before continuing. I again commend you to study the policy WP:V. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 13:27, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

But discussions on personal opinions and interpretations of policies like WP:V are best done between individuals rather than on article talk pages. Best wishes, Hyperman 42 (talk) 12:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)