Talk:Peter Hesketh-Fleetwood

Plans to edit
I plan to edit this page with research from a biographical monograph by Roger Hesketh-Fleetwood in 1966. However as a new contributor to Wikipedia, I need to find out exactly how first. Also why has a bot tagged this as University of Oxford linked? Would also like to know how to link to another page as Sir Peter should show on the members of the Athenaeum Club page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenaeum_Club,_London#Notable_members Bigcitydeserter (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, and welcome! Firstly, someone has added a tag for the University of Oxford Wikiproject because (I presume) Hesketh was educated at Oxford. Wikiprojects are just ways for editors to organise articles though, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.


 * I am at the moment in the middle of expanding and improving this article, with a view to nominating it for a good article review. In case you don't know, good article reviews are just one method we have of assessing articles. Once I nominate, another editor will review it against the good article criteria to see it it meets them. I'm not saying this to discourage you from editing the article at all, your input is certainly welcome! It's just to let you know that there is activity on it at the moment! As far as this biographical monograph goes—firstly I'd be interested (for my own sake) to know what kind of detail it contains. Secondly, where does it come from? Has it been published? We need to be careful about reliability of sources, as Verifiability is one of our core policies. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there's no reason to doubt the accuracy of the monograph, but if it is a self-published source, or particularly if it's unpublished, we may not be able to use it. Even if we can't use it, it may still be useful for fact-checking or perhaps pointing us other directions.


 * For the Athenaeum Club article (you can link articles by the way, by just putting two square brackets on either side, like this: Athenaeum Club ), it's funny—I've been meaning to add his name to that list and just hadn't got around to it yet. You can edit the relevant section in that article (just click the small "edit" link to the far right of the "Notable members" section, and add  *Peter Hesketh-Fleetwood . It looks like the list is alphabetical at the moment.


 * As for the mechanics of adding info to this article, I can talk you through it here if you have problems, or you can just add things here and I can add it to the article, it's up to you.-- Beloved Freak  23:20, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for replying so quickly - my sudden interest in this is as it's his birthday today. The source I have is "Sir Peter Hesketh-Fleetwood, A Monograph" by his great-great nephew Colonel Roger Fleetwood Hesketh (not my mistake, he really had his name the other way around), published 1951, reprinted 1966, borrowed from the archives of local historian Carmen Miller (who bought it in '66) - it lacks am ISBN number though it is printed. I was also going to ask the Archivist at the Athenaeum Club if they had any of his papers, but I gather that they would need to be printed as a book or article before being cited here. He was a founding member of the Athenaeum, as was Decimus Burton's father (& Decimus was also a member), all according to the monograph. If you think the source is valid enough, I will make some notes on what else I'd like to add and shout you if I get suck with formatting it properly. May look into the Oxford Uni connection too. Bigcitydeserter (talk) 23:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, his 210th birthday! Is it this one? Worldcat says it was published by Colonel Roger Fleetwood-Hesketh, so it would count as a self-published source. Unless there is evidence in other reliable sources that he was considered an expert, I'm not sure we can use this. However, I hate to dismiss it outright, so I will seek other opinions at the reliable sources noticeboard. In the meantime, it would still be incredibly useful if you could look over the article, and the monograph, and see if there's anything obviously missing, or incorrect according to that source. Even if it turns out we can't cite the monograph, we could try to find other sources that say the same thing. You're right that any personal papers or primary sources from the club wouldn't be useable here (although woud still be fascinating!) -- Beloved Freak  09:52, 10 May 2011 (UTC)