Talk:Lynn Bowles

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

Untitled[edit]

I doubt Miss Bowles was born in 1945! Does anybody know what year she was really born in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.190.83 (talk) 18:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Wogan said she was this morning on Radio 2 TomGreen 22:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomGreen (talk • contribs)

Yup they said it again this morning. Someone got to editing it before I did though.

Well either it's a running joke, or she looks very good for her age :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.182.27 (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page was mentioned this morning, 2 November 2007, on Wake up to Wogan. Lynn Bowles suggested that she wasn’t born in 1945 as per this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nellkyn (talk • contribs) 09:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was pretty clear from this morning's show that she wasn't born in 1945, so I've removed the DoB. 194.72.35.70 10:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The year is easily found by a couple of minutes checking online but it is rude to disclose a lady's age without permission! --jmb (talk) 11:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not limericks[edit]

I've replaced Limericks with short poems; they aren't Limericks on WUTW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apepper (talk • contribs) 20:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Donkeys[edit]

I know the BBC website claims she rides into the BBC on a donkey cart, but I have the feeling that might be a jape! 213.246.123.167 (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She does say though that her Grandfather(?) had the fastest donkey in Cardiff after winning a donkey race there. He seems to have been a carter in Cardiff in 1911 so it is possible. jmb (talk) 10:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Birth[edit]

I have removed the date of birth from the article, the ref provided doesn't provide the information without paying for it, and the date has been changed multiple times while the reference has remained the same. I tried to do some basic research on it, but different sources provide at least 3 alleged dates of birth. Until someone can provide a relatively authoritative source to verify, it should stay out per WP:BLP Monty845 00:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that a source is behind a paywall is not a valid reason for removing it. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracies?[edit]

This morning I heard Ms Bowles say, when talking to Chris Evans, that her Wikipedia article was very inaccurate, though she seemed amused by this rather than annoyed. Unfortunately she did not say what the mistakes were. Of course it's possible that she hasn't looked at the article for some time, and that it's been improved since she last did so. JH (talk page) 08:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, she's made comments like this a few times now. She refuses to state what the errors are because she prefers the article to stay wrong! However that doesn't really help our cause and we really ought to correct it where we can - which means removing anything unverifiable. Unfortunately that means deleting more than half of the article! WaggersTALK 11:45, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Lynn Bowles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth again[edit]

Is findmypast.co.uk forbidden by WP:BLPPRIMARY? I see no mention of that site. The source given for Bowles date of birth (27 January 1963), which has now been removed twice by User:Egghead06 here and here, was this. In fact, why is findmypast listed as one of our "Partner Databases" at Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Databases? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:50, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The date of birth has now been reverted three times. This time with the original GRO entry. It wasn't so long ago that we actually had an entire project for this website, with free accounts: Wikipedia:FindMyPast? The edit summary rationale is again "WP:BLPPRIMARY applies", but how can the original GRO birth certificate and the findmyupast.co.uk website entry BOTH be PRIMARY? The findmyupast.co.uk entry is a published transcription. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:22, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Transcription (ie copying) public records still means they are public records and as per BLPPRIMARY, a secondary source is required.--Egghead06 (talk) 08:46, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Whereas copying one of them, into a newspaper article, is not? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How do we know where newspapers source their dates of birth? Do they just copy findmypast.co.uk?

--Egghead06 (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We can't stop them. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:16, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why has findmypast.co.uk been used extensively as a source across Wikipedia and even been promoted as a source by means of a dedicated project? I wonder could you link to a discussion at WP:RS that clarifies consensus? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:56, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, one of the original sources Metro is described in its article not as "a tabloid" but as "a free newspaper published in tabloid format". Is that description wrong? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:05, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Are shopping newspapers reliable sources? Seems unlikely!--Egghead06 (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What are "shopping newspapers"? But, in any case, the birth date of 27 January 1963, seems to be a simple fact that is very easily verifiable, with reference to the original GRO entry and/or the findmypast.co.uk website? And those other unanswered questions? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:16, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
BLPPRIMARY covers your issues with using such sites.--Egghead06 (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may think findmypast.co.uk is a WP:PRIMARY SOURCE. That's not an unreasonable view. I'm just asking if you can demonstrate this is not just your personal opinion, but is in fact Wikipedia policy. Has it not been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There have been several discussions on the reliable sources noticeboard regarding this site. The most recent [1] was inconclusive. Some editors appear to disapprove of it, others say it is acceptable. I take the former view, you would presumably disagree?--Egghead06 (talk) 02:58, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How did you guess? Thanks for the link - I see that was 8 years ago. So we'll need to establish a local consensus. I wonder if User:Icairns has a view? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:05, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if User:Ponyo as the instigator of the question and an administrator has any updates?--Egghead06 (talk) 09:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But of course. Not to mention User:Fæ, User:Elen of the Roads, User:Andrew Lancaster and User:Andrew Lancaster, if they are still around. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:35, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am around :). I think to start with this discussion is a bit wrong in its approach because it is about "forbidding". Nearly any source can be good for some purpose or another, so we should start from the direction of asking what it is to be used for. Another issue with discussions about findmypast and ancestry.com is to specify which parts of those website are being used. But generally the question is about the primary documents which they have. ...So if we are talking about when we can or should (or should not) use primary documents such as historical birth records, newspaper articles and so on, there is quite a body of opinion about how and when to do this. We are advised to avoid it, especially for living people, and to try to find secondary sources which help confirm how to interpret those documents. (Genealogy might be a form of research often conducted by amateurs, but it is still research which often goes beyond what is obvious, so see WP:NOR.) Obviously there are also going to be occasions on WP when citing a primary document is useful and/or non-controversial. I think to discuss further we need to look at the details case by case of real examples.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Andrew. As far as I'm concerned, the main question I'm asking here is: "can we use findmypast.co.uk to source the claim that Bowles was born on 27 January 1963?" The subsidiary question is: "can we use Metro for the same purpose?" Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus has generally concluded that genealogical are not considered reliable sources for personal statistics (e.g. DOBs, middle names) in BLPs (here as an example as well as here). There is some WP:OR involved in that a supposition needs to be made that the person in the record is the same individual as the article subject and some sites include user-generated content. Also, with some of the genealogical websites the date provided is the date of the registration of the individual, not the actual birth date. If there is any dispute regarding the date, I would be extremely hesitant to rely on such primary sources and only do so if there is strong consensus to do so. --Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 20:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't think the date is in dispute here, simply the source. And the data at findmypast.co.uk can be easily validated by reference to the publicly available GRO record. I am constantly surprised that a source which has legal status in the UK, i.e the birth certificate, is actively shunned by Wikipedia. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date (again)[edit]

Somewhat surprisingly, the only Lunn Bowles birth registration in Cardiff, between 1960 and 1965, recorded by FreeBMD is this one, mother's name Prosser, for last quarter 1963. This does not square with 27 January 1963 apparently supported by GRO and findmypast.com (see above). However FreeBMD does tie in with the Companies House entry here which gives Lynn Mari Bowles with a date of birth of November 1963. "DASHWOOD & TWIST LIMITED" have a business of: 01500 - Mixed farming and 60100 - Radio broadcasting. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I have removed "27 January 1963" from the article, pending further discussion and some better source(s). Perhaps User:Egghead06 would care to comment again. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:56, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So there is doubt and conflicting info meaning we don’t add any date until we have reliable secondary sources. I can’t find any.--Egghead06 (talk) 12:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you regard Companies House as WP:RS? Is that a primary source or a secondary one? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLPPRIMARY say not as it’s a public record.--Egghead06 (talk) 14:14, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. But I think you'd agree that the weight of evidence is strongly pointing towards November 1963. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I wrote the rules, I’d agree with you and add it but…………I don’t.--Egghead06 (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. In case you missed it.... we have a similar situation at Sally Boazman. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2022 (UTC) p.s. this site has her born in 1960![reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lynn_Bowles&oldid=1206400184"