Talk:John de Aston (knight banneret)

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

Citations in horizontal format[edit]

Hi PBS, I corrected a significant error in this article you'd created (i.e. that Joan was not the only child of Sir William Littleton), citing reliable sources, and you've now seen fit to convert all the sources into a horizontal format which I've advised you several times already is very hard on my eyes and difficult for me to work with, which hardly seems a congenial thing to do. You also deleted three citations which I had added, on the ground that they 'only repeat what is said in the other citations', which is not the case.NinaGreen (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shrug: The source stated she was an only child, that editors add other sources that correct previous mistakes in sources is how Wikiepdia gets better. I would have thought that as it does not affect anything notable in this biography (eg the mother is not misnamed and her inheritance was as is stated) it was not a particularly significant error, although fixing such errors is always desirable.
As I have mentioned before horizontal is a better format for those with small screens. It is also difficult to sort citations using the format ordering that you use. Why do you place title first in the ordering rather than after author and date (which are the sort criteria) Also please use {{cite ODNB}} where appropriate as it helps those working on WP:WP DNB. Also if an person who contributes to a book is an editor please use parameter "editor-last=" and not "last=". Also if there are two or more authors then please use "last=nameA last2=nameB etc rather than placing the second author as part of the first author's first name "first=firstname, nameB, firstnameB".
What facts are in the other two citations that are not currently supported with the current citations (pleas give quotes from the text of the two sources). -- PBS (talk) 18:37, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's pointless to continue a discussion when your reply begins with the discourteous word 'Shrug'. I've made my points, i.e. (1) that it's thoughtless of you to reformat my own citations to a format which I've advised you several times is very hard on my eyes, and that, (2) citing reliable sources, I corrected a significant error in the article you created, several of which reliable sources you then saw fit to delete on the inaccurate ground that they 'only repeat what is said in the other citations', which is not true. I'll leave it at that, and I trust you will too. NinaGreen (talk) 18:48, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John de Aston (knight banneret). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parliament - probable error in the sources[edit]

The article currently notes (sourced to Boddie) that de Aston represented Staffordshire in the 1495, 1497, 1504, 1510, 1515, and 1523 Parliaments.

However, the History of Parliament 1509-1558 has "no names known for 1510-23" in Staffordshire, and the old History of Parliament 1439-1509 has no entry for "Aston" (or de Aston). Interestingly, the preface specifically mentions Aston of Tixall as one of the knightly families that are not represented among the MPs, even though you might expect to see them.

It's hard to cite a negative, but my feeling is that the two HoP volumes are more likely to be correct here than a 1950s genealogical survey, so I've removed the statements referring to it. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_de_Aston_(knight_banneret)&oldid=1199111935"