User talk:Rms125a@hotmail.com/Archive 3

RE: Article
Hey, I got your message and I check over the article. So far I think you're making a good start. The article asserts notability and has a neutral tone to it. That's certainly good. A few things that could definitely help the article is if you added a few more references to back up her awards and achievements. For example, the part about how she was awarded the Silver Bauhinia Star and became the justice of peace should have a source to back up these claims. I found this source for the silver Bauhinia star award so you could include that if you wanted to. If you want me to move the article into the mainspace soon, I could do that for you if you'd like. Once it's in the mainspace I could add a few tags onto the article to classify it; that way other editors can know about the article and help out to expand it. Overall, the article seems to be improved since it was originally deleted. Keep up the good work. Hope that helps. Icestorm815 •  Talk  14:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Chow Yei-ching
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chow Yei-ching, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Single sourced blp, encyclopedic notability not indicated, unencyclopedic tone,

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Jeandré, 2009-05-02t15:06z 15:06, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Re, I'm not sure what you're asking - the article is not ready for Peer review because that's only "intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work". I found the page because it wasn't yet patrolled, I proposed deletion because it's a "Single sourced blp, encyclopedic notability not indicated, unencyclopedic tone,". I didn't see the AfD because I hadn't checked my watchlist in 2 weeks, and put on a BLPrefimprove tag when I saw it in my watchlist because there is still only 1 citation and wp:v states that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." Why are you asking me to ignore the wp:v, wp:blp, and wp:rs? -- Jeandré, 2009-05-10t21:29z

Herman Melville in Troy, New York
I understand you were probably just taking words at face value what the article said about Herman Melville living in Troy "for a brief residence", and therefore removing it from the notable people section in good faith. But the facts are that his residence in Troy was more than brief and his home is today referred to as the Herman Melville House and as you can see, it has its own article here on wikipedia, it is on the National Register of Historic Places as well, to therefore say he doesnt deserve mention as a notable person seems a bid odd. He actually wrote at least one story while living there in Troy. Therefore I have undone your edit and added info about the house and a citation. I do appreciate your help on the article but encourage all editors to do some "due diligence" and research the info first before removing info they find dubious or is uncited. Too many editors indiscrimately remove uncited info or info they dont believe because "I've never heard about it" without looking into it because they "have no interest in the subject", I encourage editors who have no interest in researching a subject to then stay away from deleting from a subject, editing should be constructive, learning new things, and building up, it shouldnt be about removing information.Camelbinky (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello!
Yesterday I responded to the message re: Pre-Code Hollywood you left on my talk page. I thought you might not have seen it since you haven't replied. It might be best to continue the discussion there so everything can be read in sequence. Thanks! LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 16:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Date of birth missing vs Year of birth missing
Hi. Concerning this edit of yours I would like to inform you at per instructions in Category:Date of birth missing, this category should be placed in discussion pages. For articles pages there is the Category:Year of birth missing. The same holds for Date of death missing. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 10:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Concerning this edit I would like additionally to note that Category:Place of birth missing and Category:Place of death missing are also intended for discussion pages. Thanks again, Magioladitis (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Categories
Please don't add people directly to "(State or province) politicians" if they're already in one or more subcategories of that, such as Category:Members of the Maryland House of Delegates. Wikipedia has rules about duplicate categorization of this type. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 16:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

A few MOS issues
Hello, regarding this edit, I just want to let you know that "ibid" and similar abbreviations are not recommended; see WP:IBID. Adding single line breaks is also not recommended; see WP:NEWLINE. Thanks. — LOL T/C 16:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Why are you continuing to add single line breaks here? — LOL T/C 16:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Two more things I'd like to add because of this: Wikipedia is not censored, and "A quotation is not italicized simply because it is a quotation". — LOL T/C 16:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help. I was not familiar with the rules on obscenities inside quotes. Trust me I am not a wannabe censor. As far as the line breaks I don't know exactly why this happens. You are not the first person to point this out, although I haven't had any problems lately. I really don't know what I am doing wrong here, b/c when I do a post-editing preview the breaks do not appear as such and it all looks OK. I will have to read up on WP:PUNC. I know that is not necessary to italicize quotes; I usually do so only for the purpose of emphasis.
 * Thanks again, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me. The line breaks don't show up in the preview because of how single line breaks are handled for the output, but they should be visible after clicking "Show changes" (you should notice a large amount of red text on the left column, which makes diff-checking difficult).  This is the first I've heard of a line breaks repeatedly being inserted by accident, so I'm curious, what operating system and web browser are you using, and are they using the latest patches?  For the last few months I've been using Mozilla Firefox on Windows XP or Vista, and I haven't experienced any problems. — LOL T/C 04:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Bauhinia Star bios
As per a well-reasoned opinion by User:DGG I have decided that I will only work on creating pages for Gold Bauhinia Star awardees, not those who were awarded Silver or Bronze. If I ever complete the task then I may reconsider based on individual merit. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 10:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Disambigs
Hi, you might want to review WP:DISAMBIG. There was no need to move Mary Rundle and create a disambiguation page because we only have an article on one Mary Rundle. It doesn't matter if there are 1,000 people with that name. Also disambiguation pages shouldn't have piping or external links like that. I know you meant well but I wanted to point the correct information out to you. Drawn Some (talk) 22:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of María Amelia López Soliño
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article María Amelia López Soliño, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * not notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.  Ron h jones (Talk) 00:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Mary Rundle
You are probably right about the original editor. I have ordered 2 books on the Wrens from my library so they may have furtehr information and leads. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ada Norris
A tag has been placed on Ada Norris requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  7   talk   11:43, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Block and reversal
My apologies; I was not aware of such an unusual circumstance as having an email address user name "grandfathered in". I've reversed the block. My apologies for any confusion and for countermanding the agreement/decision at WP:AN/I. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Let me clarify my own understanding:
 * Your username was grandfathered in because it existed before the restrictions on the "@" symbol in usernames.
 * You are not permitted to create another account as per the agreement found at User:Eliz81/RMS.
 * Seeing as an account name change is a different arrangement and not an alternative (coexisting) account, I would support a formal request for a name change with the proviso that the old name remain as a locked redirect to your new account name. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
MLauba (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello!
Hi Robert! Thanks for the talk page message. I've been pretty inactive, basically just making small corrections in articles I read. But I must admit, I have been checking your contribs and talk page quite regularly to make sure everything was going ok. I am so pleased at how well the last three months have gone. You really have done a terrific job and a lot of work, and I am so happy that I was able to help get you back on here. Getting you unbanned was sort of my last Wikipedia hurrah. I know it's technically still your probation period, but if you continue as you are it should be smooth sailing. I also notice that you were blocked for your username, as well as getting a bunch of notices. I think it's time to change it and make a request at WP:CHU. Feel free to link to my talk page edit here, and I will also be happy to update the terms of probation to make it clear that this is all above board and well, rather necessary. For full transparency, you can link your username request in a brief WP:ANI post too. That should cover all your bases. And it will save you lots of trouble. All the best, ~ Eliz 81 (C)  16:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Maude Storey
All of the findarticles links on the Maude Storey page go to error pages. Findarticles shouldn't be used anyway, it's a search engine. You should find a particular link and use that. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

ANI
Note that I've replied to your post. I can't really phrase it well without it coming off a bit patronising, but could you try to cool down a bit? If you're angry, hitting the "edit" button and posting messages is the worst thing to do, and I know that from personal experience. Ironholds (talk) 16:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Jessica Matthews
Do we have any actual evidence that Jessie Matthews was christened 'Jessica'? I was wondering about this in the infobox since before I saw your edits, and obviously what you have now written tends to make the 'Jessica' much more prominent in this article.

Neither Thornton's biography nor the original newspaper reports that I have seen of the various legal cases in which she was involved appear to suggest that she was officially named Jessica rather than Jessie: in the contexts where full names are quoted she is "Jessie Margaret Matthews" at birth (Thornton, p17), then "Mrs. Jessie Margaret Lytton" ("Times" report of divorce proceedings, 22 Nov 1929 and 12 July 1930) and "Jessie Margaret Lytton, formerly Matthews" (Thornton, p103) at her wedding to Sonnie Hale, and finally "Mrs. Jessie Margaret Monro" at their divorce ("Times" legal column, 4 July 1944). None of the above prove that she wasn't a Jessica, but as 'John Robert Hale Monro' and 'Evelyn Elsie Monro' are given their full legal names in addition to the ones more familiarly used, one would expect Jessie Matthews to have received similar treatment if applicable.

Thornton cites her reaction to her daughter's christening of her second child with the names "Jessica Sarah Jane" as being 'I suppose she couldn't quite bring herself to call her Jessie and use my own name" (Thornton, p306-7). This doesn't really prove anything either way (it's entirely probable that Catherine either assumed that her mother's name actually was Jessica, or that as a Countess, albeit an Italian one, she wanted to give the child a 'proper' name rather than a Cockney diminutive) but I find it suggestive.

At any rate I feel there is some doubt in the matter. Igenlode (talk) 23:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Prince Pedro Luis
Hi! Are you aware that "Duetto" is not the name of a writer but instead, of the Publisher of that Magazine (geared towards Brazilian History)? --Lecen (talk) 13:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, you did a great job. I was just explaining to you as I felt that you had imagined that it was surname instead of the publisher's name. --Lecen (talk) 14:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

moved from user page
As per your notice to me about Tony Maggs death and no "reliable" source - the news came from Cedric Selzer, Maggs' mechanic during his Formula 1 spell & good friend. This has also been confirmed by two reliable sources in the South African press. I work in the sport (as a researcher & historian) & am not in the habit of creating fake deaths, especially not when I am so saddened by Maggs death. I have no idea how to make a complaint about this, but I am fed up of not being believed when news is so obviously factual. I have found a "reliable" source which hopefully satisfies your criteria. I would like an apology, but do not expect one.

I know you are only doing what the Wikipedia edit police ask you to & that's fair enough, but I was disappointed by your tone that the link wasn't reliable & the suggestion the death posting was a fake.

Thank You - Richard Jenkins (Old Racing Cars)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.181.105 (talk • contribs) 18:23, June 3, 2009