User talk:BrownPearl

I can't save my expanded information.

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Rowland Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Baxter (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) 10:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The footnote for a citation from The Block Museum of Art's web site, refers reader to the wrong source. I've trie everything to correct it. I really want to use it. BrownPearl (talk) 02:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rowland Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Star is Born (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) 12:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rowland Brown, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Purple Gang (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) 11:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Original research in Rowland Brown
I've just encountered the Rowland Brown article, to which you've made major additions. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that many of those additions appear to contravene one of Wikipedia's core policies: no original research.

Your userpage declares that you've done extensive research on Brown. From my reading of the article, it appears that you've incorporated a great deal of this research into it, including your own conclusions about the truth or falsehood of various rumors about Brown. Unfortunately, this is just what the NOR policy is intended to prevent. It's appropriate to quote rumors and the conclusions of others about them, but not to include your own conclusions, however well-founded they might be.

There is an out, however. If you've published your work in a reliable source (e.g. a refereed, or at least a reputable, journal), it's perfectly all right to cite it, using yourself in third person.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with Wikipolicy; if you're not acquainted with NOR, I'd strongly encourage you to read it and modify the Brown article to bring it into conformity therewith. Please feel free to leave a note at my talk page if you've got any questions about this, or if there's any help I can give you. Ammodramus (talk) 21:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC) I have spent much of the day just restoring the damage and continuing to put in the sources, It takes m awhile to do it because I am slowed by certain physical problems. I beg you to be patient and not assume that items that need verification come from the top of my head. Anything i can't provide a source for, I will remove. And no matter how long it takes, I will get those passages singled out in the proper format. It occurs to me that you imagine my "research" to be limited to stuff in the attic. That is not the case. I have done most of my research online and the rest in the actual publications. One problem I have is understanding Wikipedia's documentation. BrownPearl (talk) 16:28, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)