User talk:JohnAGough

August 2019
Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Trip the light fantastic, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please also see WP:IPCV. DonIago (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

June 2021
Hello, I'm Mathglot. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Elagabalus, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mathglot. I couldn't find your TALK page, or rather, when I clicked on the link to it, I could see an array of messages and exchanges with Wikipedia contributors, but not your MESSAGE to me, about Eliogabalus and Edith Sitwell, and nowhere I could REPLY to you. So I am editing my own USER TALK, hoping you will see it. I do not know, yet, how to CITE in Wikipedia, so usually I refer to published works using two apostrophes to start and end as This Cited Title. What I added to the POETRY sub-section of the article on Eliogabalus was correct. The Wikipedia page on "Facade Suite: an Entertainment" confirms this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fa%C3%A7ade_(entertainment)

Could you fix my absent citation, please? Thanks, John

October 2021
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. David Biddulph (talk) 12:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

February 2023
Hello, I'm Arjayay. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Thomas More, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023
Hello, I'm SunDawn. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Lovely Joan, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. &maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   03:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Try this as the source, SunDawn.
 * I have not learned how to correctly edit, with sources, in Wikipedia.
 * But if you can adjust the text you deleted, maybe that will help.
 * https://mainlynorfolk.info/lloyd/songs/lovelyjoan.html
 * Thanks,
 * John JohnAGough (talk) 04:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

National varieties of English
Hello. In a recent edit to the page Country Gardens, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. EditingProperly (talk) 10:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Thomas Cromwell, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. Thank you. AntientNestor (talk) 07:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you, AntientNestor. (I suppose your penname means something. It is lost on me, apart from your obsolete spelling of "ancient".)
 * Iff you red my chaynged text you wud see I rendered in Moderne Englysshe what had been correctly quoted in the spelling-of-the-day as used by Thomas Cromwell. (Dictionaries had not been sufficiently invented, nor printing presses, that spelling was regularised. As you know.)
 * Not all readers of the article would understand Cromwell's phonetic and obsolete spelling, or vocabulary.
 * Hence, my text.
 * IF that is a REASONABLE thing to do, for the sake of modern readers' understanding, I hope you will restore (or restore and improve) my translation-in-square-brackets.
 * Thank you, and best wishes for your work with Wikipedia in 2024, and onwards!
 * John JohnAGough (talk) 09:51, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What you've done looks like WP:OR, which isn't allowed.
 * Thanks for you interest in my username. I was reading Troilus and Cressida when I signed up for a WP account. AntientNestor (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Shakespearean explanation of your WP contributor name.
 * If you'd ever read Shakespeare in a facsimile folio edition, you would appreciate the editors who regularised and modernised the spelling Shakespeare (his printers, too) used.
 * I must confess ignorance: WP:OR? JohnAGough (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems that you have introduced your own wording here. I know that there are a lot of reliable source books with the letter rendered into modernised English. Sourced to one of these, the wording could be introduced as another entry in the article's footnotes section. An existing example is Diarmaid MacCulloch's comments about  "Crummle" or "Cromell" based on the spellings used by Cromwell's correspondents (footnote "a" at the time of Posting). AntientNestor (talk) 10:53, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * OK. You win.
 * I could translate into English a bit of German that no one else has translated. But I can't translate into Modern English a bit of Tudor English. However, I could cite someone else's existing translation. That's a subtle distinction. JohnAGough (talk) 00:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

That's the way to go. Tracy Borman (to name but one) has one you could use here—it's page 59 in the print version. I think it would pass WP:COPYQUOTE. --AntientNestor (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Anarchism
Hi JohnAGough,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 13:33, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Czar. My small addition to the article on Anarchy was probably as far as I could go, based on my limited reading about pre-literate prehistoric societies. I think I'll let it go, for now. JohnAGough (talk) 13:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You are welcome in the project if you change your mind! We currently have a drive to destub articles, many of which have sources ready for paraphrase. It's a great way to get started. czar  13:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Czar. That is very generous! I wish you well with the drive to destub articles. I will not be able to join, for lack of time (pursuing my own different projects), and I feel I lack enough background in this topic. JohnAGough (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Your edit to Tubthumping has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. ResPM (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 11:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Your edit to La La Lucille has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. DanCherek (talk) 06:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I paraphrased. I deliberately did not cut-and-paste quote. I hope this acceptable, Dan. I deliberately cited the source URL to verify my reportage. JohnAGough (talk) 06:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Citing the source isn't enough, you need to summarize information in your own words in order to comply with Wikipedia's guidelines. For clarity, here is a comparison of the two, with overlapping text shown in bold.
 * Your edit:


 * Source:


 * That is significant copy-pasting; please don't do that in the future. In addition, when summarizing information from sources, it's really important to be careful about not merely superficially modifying of the source material, but rather actually writing your own summary. I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing). DanCherek (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, Dan.
 * That is clear and very helpful.
 * I think the discovery of the written musical score for "La La Lucille" is sufficiently important that I will persist, using my own words.
 * John JohnAGough (talk) 00:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Outlander (novel), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 15:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you, TJRC. I understand the need to provide a source for original research. But in this instance there is no actual research. All I did was note the similarity of narrative theme: time-slip from the Twentieth century to the time of the Jacobite Uprising. No original research is needed to state this, in Elizabeth Goudge's novel, "The Middle Window", or in the "Outlander" novel. Facts, stated, surely do not constitute original research.
 * If this is clear, I suggest my contribution be reinstated.
 * Thanks,
 * John JohnAGough (talk) 22:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, what you're describing is exactly what WP:OR proscribes: putting your own observations into the article (original to you) that have not been reported elsewhere. TJRC (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * OK. I understand.
 * This makes it very difficult, sometimes.
 * I shall have to publish an article on this, and cite myself.
 * An original observation of two facts must start somewhere.
 * Thanks for explaining further. JohnAGough (talk) 23:15, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you publish it in a WP:RS, it can be cited in Wikipedia, but since you would have a WP:COI, the best way to accomplish it would be to then post the link to the talk page and then suggest that another editor add the content and source. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024
The recent edits you made to Harry Graham (poet) have been reverted, as you did not cite your source(s). Please review WP:V and WP:OR. This is an encyclopedia, so we try to write neutrally (see WP:IMPARTIAL). A word like "cunning" implies that we approve of what Graham did, or at least is our characterization of what he did. The characterization is unnecessary editorializing: let the reader decide whether what he did was cunning, humorous, cute, foolish, or whatever. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)