User talk:Celtus/Archive 2008 May

Genealogy
I've replied on my own page. Thanks for fixing my mistake. Ashton1983 (talk) 08:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Armigerous clan
Thanks for taking the time to add so much back in to Armigerous clan. Great job! Isoxyl (talk) 13:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The unverifiable stuff shouldn't have been in the list anyways, that's all.--Celtus (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Clan Arthur
Hello, I am the official web site keeper for the Clan Arthur Association. I apologize for messing up the Wiki Clan Arthur page. I am not trying to mess it up, but the editing is not easy for me. I use Frontpage to build and maintain my site, but your Wiki wants me to know HTML. The information that your site has for Clan Arthur is both wrong and very offensive to our Clan. We have had ongoing arguments with Clan Campbell for literally centuries over who was a "Campbell-Arthur" and who was a "real Arthur". Your Clan Arthur page is completly supporting the Clan Campbell version of this argument. If the Campbells version would be posted anywhere, I would think it should be on THEIR page, and not ours. The "true" History of Clan Arthur is availble on our site, and it is this information that I have been trying to post on Wiki.

http://www.clanarthur.org/History.htm

Is there any easier way to get the Clan Arthur Wiki page edited to properly inform visitors of the real Clan Arthur History? Thank you for any and all help! Bob McArthur —Preceding unsigned comment added by MacA501 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Bob. The thing about contributing stuff to Wikipedia is that the information has to be free. So copy and pasting text off websites is unacceptable. Did you notice, when you edit anytihng on Wikipedia that near the bottom of the page it says

Please note''': * If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it. * Only public domain resources can be copied without permission—this does not include most web pages or images. * See our policies and guidelines for more information on editing.


 * Which website are you webmaster of - http://www.clanarthur.org/History.htm? I did a google search and saw most of the stuff you were pasting wholesale into the article seemed to be from that website. I guess if you are the webmaster of this website, and the text was created by or for that website, and you are ok with it being posted on wikipedia, then it is not a copyright infringement.
 * Well, the article is not supposed to be about promoting anyone's version of history. You can't just remove information because it doesn't promote your cause - so removing anything 'Campbell' in the article is unacceptable. It's hard to know what you find offensive or wrong, other than the mentioning of Clan Campbell in the article. The article is supposed relate to readers the relevant info that has been published on the clan. Is that you that keeps switching http://www.clanarthur.com/ with http://www.clannarthur.com/ in the external links section? If it is, why are you doing that? Why did you remove the hunting tartan - because the ref mentions that it is based upon the Campbell tartan? You can't just take that out of an article because you have a beef with everything Campbell. Thats all.--Celtus (talk) 04:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Celtus, Thank you for your response. Yes I did notice the copying guidelines that showed up after I pasted, but since it is all my work, I figured that I was OK. You are correct in that I am the complete web site owner/operator of www.clanarthur.org I am also the past President of The Clan Arthur Association USA, and I work very closely with our current President, and past High Commissioner for the USA. I know anyone can say they are anything, but I will be more than happy to provide you with names and home phone numbers to any Officer here in the USA or even our Clan Chief in Scotland can verify my accounts. As far as the Campbells go, I have nothing at all against them. They are a fine Clan in their own right. The problem is historical accuracy and it is a problem that Clan Arthur has been dealing with for many years. It is true that the MacArthurs and Campbells are related. The MacArthurs were the senior branch in ancient times and it wasn't until James I beheaded 3 of the most powerful Clan Chiefs of Scotland, that the Campbells began their rise. Being a "broken Clan" for centuries, allowed the Campbells to basically rewrite history and claim the MacArthurs were merely a sept. Hugh Peskitt, at the request of the current Clan Arthur armigors, and the Lord Lyon himself (against the wishes of the recently past Duke of Argyle [aka Campbells]), did the most exhaustive and comprehinsive genealogical research of Clan Arthur ever made. Not only did Mr. Peskit uncover the MacArthur line existing back to the earlist of Scottish records... but he also discovered that the original Arms, of 13 crowns, of King Arthur... had 10 crowns added to it at a later time, and the original Arms of King Arthur matched the 3 crowns of Clan Arthur. Please forgive my ramblings. Suffice it to say that the "History of Clan Arthur" that can be found on my site: www.clanarthur.org/history.htm Is not only accurate, but also supported by our Clan Scrivener, High Commissioner US, and the very Chief of Clan Arthur himself. If it would be possible to pay someone, such as yourself, to edit our Wiki page to reflect the proper and supported history of our Clan, I would gladly see that payment would be made. The switching of the the links "Clanarthur.com and Clannarthur.com" was me. We have a large US branch and also a large Scottish branch. Our Scottish society always feels that the US has too much, and so I felt it would be more "fair" to have at least one of the two links promote our Scottish members. As for the Tartan that was deleted, it was purely accidental on my part. I tried to recover it, but could find no way. It had nothing to do with being "Campbell like", I had just cut and pasted, and everything went bad. Thank you again for you time and help with our Clan Arthur Wiki. As your Wikipedia continues to grow... the information people find should be the most accurate possible... and this family of Clan Arthur appreciate your lighting the way for our lost and newly interested members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MacA501 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clearing everything up Bob. The only real problem was the copyright thing. You don't have to prove anything, the spirit of Wikipedia is basically assume good faith. The only goal is for a better article on Clan Arthur. I can see how the article makes the Campbells seem as almost fathers to the MacArthurs - and that this should be fixed, and not represented as fact. I'm sorry for not making things more clear before, about the copyright stuff. About having someone edit on behalf of your organisation - i think it would be a bad idea if you had someone do that. Editors shouldn't be editing articles to promote a particular version or 'side' to a story. That would be against the spirit of the project. You can imagine how some articles can become battle grounds for people with different points of view on one subject. Here's Wikipedia's guideline on conflicts of interest - Conflict of interest. The guideline certainly doesn't mean you have to put up with misinformation. It just that, just because something is insulting doesn't mean it should edited out of an article. Another guideline is verifiability, not truth - (Verifiability). So, the "real" MacArthur history should not be the end and all of the article. The article is supposed to represent reliable accounts that have been published on the clan. Even if it does going against the "real" history. I think you can understand.--Celtus (talk) 04:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)