User talk:SylviaStanley

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to James Marjoribanks, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: James Marjoribanks was changed by SylviaStanley (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-05-27T13:03:29+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

James Marjoribanks
Thanks for swiftly adding more info to this info. However, it appears that most of it is taken literally orsemi-literally from his obituary in the Telegraph. While this is a prefectly good source, we should not post copyrighted text in Wikipedia but write our own articles. Slightly rewriting the article while maintaining most of the original is not sufficient: you must base the article on good sources, but completely write it in your own words (apart from quotes, obviously). There is no hurry to do so, the article will not be deleted if it is not expanded soon. Fram (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Fram, Thanks for your comments. I thought I had read somewhere that if references are quoted, you could use information from other sources. I therefore thought that if I quoted the obituaries at the bottom of the page I was at liberty to use the information in them verbatim. Obviously not. I will try to rewrite the new parts of the article. Actually the Daily Telegraph obituary is only a minor part of the new sections I included. But it is true, I used several times sections I took from all four obituaries as the easiest way to write and article. How do I "...base the article on good sources.." Is the obituary a good source? I'm not sure I know how to quote a reference repeatedly. I suppose it must be in the instructions somewhere. Incidentally, you previously deleted sections on James Marjoribanks saying they were unverifiable. One section (on the cocktails at the Peking Embassy) was mentioned in Sir Roy Denman's obituary of Sir James. Should I put the obituary as a reference? The section on the fiancées coming to China and the entry of the Japanese troops to Hankou were in his unpublished memoirs. Should I reference these? He also, before he died, told me one or two things verbally which I would like include in the article. Is this permissible? How would I reference that? SylviaStanley (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You can reference by using the template template:citenews. Repeated use of the same source can be achieved by using "refname" instead of "ref". Footnotes has more info on this. As for the parts I removed earlier: I assumed all of them came from the unpublished memoirs, which are not acceptable as a source on Wikipedia (neither are conversations you had with the subject). Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable, and those additions are not verifiable. The part I removed which did not come from these memoirs but from an obituary can obviously be reinserted (as long as it is not a verbatim copy of course). These obituaries are good sources, since they are published in wellknown newspapers. Our reliable sources guideline has more info on this. Fram (talk) 07:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for you help Fram. I have re-written the sections France to Retirement and added more references. There were six obituaries on Sir James in the major UK newspapers. Often they all mentioned similar information, so rather than naming all six obituaries each time, I usually used just one or two that I thought were best. SylviaStanley (talk) 11:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Help re. image
I cannot view the image "Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.jpg" on subject page called "Regent Terrace." Can someone please help me? I uploaded the image "Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.jpg" to Wikimedia Commons and it seems to exist OK there. I have tried Firefox, Internet Explorer and Google Chrome browsers but I get the same result - I cannot see the image. I uploaded another file (Regent Terrace Edinburgh.jpg) to Wikipedia and tried placing it in the page "Regent Terrace" but I gor the same result. I tried adding image of the Beltane Fire Festival (copied from the page "Calton Hill") to the page "Regent Terrace" and I could see this image fine. So maybe I am doing something wrong when uploading my images? SylviaStanley (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)




 * The image is fine, as hopefully you will see here. The exact name is File:Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.JPG - I can only imagine that you were typing it incorrectly - capitalization is important.


 * I will add it to that article now. For more help, you can either;


 * Leave a message on my own talk page;
 * Use a - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put , and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~ at the end;
 * Talk to us live, with this or this.


 * Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  09:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * P.S. I have now added it to Regent Terrace - it was not working there because it had "jpg" in lower-case, not "JPG" in upper-case. I fixed it with this edit.  Chzz  ►  09:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Very many thanks for your help. SylviaStanley (talk) 14:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Sylvia, I just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for your work on GMO related articles. It's always good to see someone adding well referenced information to what is a topic full of controversy. A couple of things you might find useful if you are referencing scientific papers are cite pmid and cite doi. These templates allow you to just add the pmid or doi of a paper as a reference, and then a computer automatically comes along and fills in all the details for you. I might not have explained that tremendously well, so here's an example. If you look at the article, the reference will be complete. I find these save me a lot of time! Smartse (talk) 19:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank for pointing out the templates cite pmid and cite doi. I was always mystified in the past about what doi in a reference. SylviaStanley (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Genetically modified food
Hi Sylvia. Like Smartse above I have noticed some good contributions to GM articles. Unfortunately I do not think your recent one to Genetically modified food had a reliable enough source (imposteurs.over-blog.com), so I have reverted it. Looking at the paper it say "Greenpeace contributed to the start of the investigations by funding first statistical analyses in 2006, the results were then processed further and evaluated independently by the authors". I don't think we can say more than that until something is published in a more reliable source. Regards AIR corn (talk) 07:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Aircon. I agree. The reference was not a good one and I wasn't sure about including it. I will include a reference from GMO Compass which I think is a better sourceSylviaStanley (talk) 09:50, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Medicine
''If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal. If you are interested in contributing more to medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here).'' JFW &#124; T@lk  22:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * WRT referencing requirements please read WP:MEDRS. Cheers Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 17:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Invitation for a Short Research Survey
Hi, I am a PhD student at Carnegie Mellon University doing some research into editing and reverts on Wikipedia. I am asking Wikipedians that I have found have made contributions to biological sciences articles on Wikipedia to complete a short survey that will help me develop interfaces and tools for newcomers and administrators. The survey will take about 10-15 minutes, and will involve you pretending that you are editing the page on genetic engineering and making some quick judgments on how controversial or likely to be reverted a word sampled from an edit might be. This will help me to validate a model that predicts which words will be reverted based on the history of an article, which if successful will be turned into an interface to help with Wikipedia editing and encourage newcomers. If you would like to participate, please complete the survey on SurveyMonkey here. You can find out more about me on my user page and personal home page. I'm more than happy to talk more about this research on my talk page or by email, and thank you for your time. JeffRz (talk) 02:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Refs again
As previously stated high quality refs are required per WP:MEDRS Cheers Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 14:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The preferred references are either review articles or major textbooks.-- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Your last ref was excellent BTW and welcome to Wikipedia :-) It takes a little time to figure everything out. If you have any questions feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:51, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments SylviaStanley (talk) 16:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Calton Hill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Calton_Hill A discussion is continuing related to some comments you earlier added so I thought it was only fair to let you know.RafikiSykes (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts?
Hi - I have been working on a lot on the suite of articles in the genetic engineering family. I noticed you have been dipping in and out during this time. Just wanted to ping you to get your thoughts on what I've done to try to rationalize them and to pull together bits of information that were spread all over. Some of it has been pretty dramatic and I've been a bit afraid of offending .... but I followed the Be bold guideline and just did it. Do you hate it? do you like it? Ideas to change it? Just looking for overall feedback... if you don't want to talk generally, that's fine too!.Jytdog (talk) 23:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I think your changes are very good. Like you, I felt that, in general, the articles on genetic engineering needed a lot of attention. People had stuck in bits that were in the wrong place, were at odds with information in other articles and/or had become out of date. I congratulate you on following the Be bold guidelines. I think you have been very successful. As you say, I dip in now and then when I feel that a piece of information is incorrect or out of date. I hope I haven't messed up some of your major changes with my minor ones. I have one more, relatively minor, thing that seems to me poorly described in the genetic engineering articles - the exact procedure used by the European Union when a member state invokes the safeguard clause for GMOs. There is lots of rambling stuff about individual states banning some GM crops but, in my opinion, there is no description of the procedure followed. SylviaStanley (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying! I am glad you find the changes to be helpful.   I have found all your changes to be great, so from my point of view, rock on!  I am an American so am not familiar with EU procedures.  If you know the story please fix it!  Thanks again. Jytdog (talk) 14:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi - you may be in the middle of changing this but I notice that there are significant differences between the GM sugar beet legal sections of the articles "Genetically modified food controversies" and "Sugar beet."SylviaStanley (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

comments on my userpage
Thanks!! That was very kind of you to say. :) Jytdog (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Warrender Baths Club was accepted
 Warrender Baths Club, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! -- Wywin (talk &#124; contribs) 19:13, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Close paraphrasing
Hi. I noticed that your edit here introduced content fairly similar to some lines in this Atlantic.com article. I have a conflict of interest with The Atlantic, so I'm not going to revert your edit, but I'd encourage you to be more careful about this kind of thing in the future, and to see if maybe you can reword what you wrote here a little bit. I don't think you were trying to do anything wrong, but we're very careful about copyrights here, and really try to avoid anything that could be seen as copying from other sources, even if it's only a few sentence fragments. — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  02:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi PinkAmpersand. Thanks for the message.  This is very interesting.  I have never read the article in the Atlantic you refer to.  I didn't even know it existed.  If you think my entry is somewhat similar to the Atlantic article which I have never seen, perhaps, if I have time, I will read the Atlantic article carefully and try to reword my entry a bit. SylviaStanley (talk) 15:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Waterloo
With this edit on 27 Nov 2014, you added an inline citation to a book but you did not include a page number. Please could you add it now? -- PBS (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Will do PBS. However, Simm's book "The Longest Afternoon: The 400 Men Who Decided the Battle of Waterloo" describes in minute detail the battle of the 400 German and British soldiers at La Haye Sainte holding off Napoleon's soldiers during the battle of Waterloo. This citation comes next to the Wikipedia text:  "But these brave Germans had held the center of the battlefield for almost the entire day. This had stalled the French advance."   This is essentially a description of Simm's whole book.  I had purposely left out the page number when I entered the reference.  I will insert the pages where there are the final conclusions in the book when I get a copy out of the library again.SylviaStanley (talk) 22:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Larry Fogle
Hey, thanks for your addition to List of wrongful convictions in the United States. Would you be able to create at least a stub article for Larry Fogle? That's one of the requirements for addition to the list. Otherwise, the list would be unrealistically lengthy. Bali88 (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2015 (UTC) OK. Will do.

Help us improve wikimeets by filling in the UK Wikimeet survey!
Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:
 * https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJMNVVD

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 18:11, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Gene therapy
Hi! In case you haven't watchlisted it, I've made some additions to the article. Some additional ref's as well as adding "a committee of" to your edit, because the report didn't come from the entirety of the 2 academies. DennisPietras (talk) 21:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC) Thanks!SylviaStanley (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Coley (January 20)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mortee was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Richard Coley and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Richard Coley, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Richard_Coley Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mortee&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Richard_Coley reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mortee (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Coley (March 6)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chetsford was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Richard Coley and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Richard Coley, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Richard_Coley Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chetsford&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Richard_Coley reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 04:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Coley has been accepted
 Richard Coley, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Legacypac (talk) 22:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Richard_Coley help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Talk:Genealogical DNA test
I'm sorry for reverting your edit. It wasn't on purpose. Regards. Cynko (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
 * Female sperm ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Female_sperm check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Female_sperm?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Gene editing
 * Reproductive technology ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Reproductive_technology check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Reproductive_technology?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Gene editing

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Genetic genealogy
Hi SylviaStanley. I made some changes to Genetic genealogy in line with MOS:TENSE that reversed some of your recent edits (I only realized this while editing when I saw the recent edit history). I was wondering why you changed the tense to past tense? Thanks Helen  Online  11:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi HelenOnline, in my opinion, Wikipedia is a encyclopedia site that describes things that have happened in the past. I don't think it is a news site. So my normal knee-jerk reaction to any present tense is to change it to the past.   Also, even if you have good reasons for describing something in the present tense, in my experience, once the news-worthiness of a Wikipedia article has declined, nobody bothers to update it.  So I've found present tenses describing things that have happened 10 or 15 years ago although the facts have changed completely in the meantime.  If you feel strongly about putting present tenses please do.  But if things change, please come back and update the site.  For example, if, say, National Geographic in the future transferred their Genetic genealogy stuff to some other organisation which had a completely different way of working, please don't leave forever the present tense in this article.  Regards SylviaStanley (talk) 11:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for explaining. Wikipedia is not a news site, but it also does not only describe historical events. It is not a question of feelings or personal preference. We have a sensible MOS that editors may challenge directly but not ignore. Please don't use the past tense when it is not yet applicable. It can be misleading, and make work for other editors. When I read the latest wording of the GG article it didn't make sense to me and I wondered what had changed that I was unaware of, so I asked you about it. It could be misleading for readers less informed than me, unless they undertake further research. Also nobody is obliged to update the site, so please don't suggest that. Helen  Online  08:48, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * You are right. I hadn't read the Manual of Style entry on verb tense.  Thanks for bringing it to my attention.  I'll be more careful in future.SylviaStanley (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Helen  Online  15:51, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Please stop adding Parabon as a contributor to the Manteuffel case. Full Genomes Corp. did the DNA analysis. Thank you for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adgqet (talk • contribs) 21:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message Adget. If FGC did the DNA analysis, who did the genetic genealogy analysis on the Manteuffel case? SylviaStanley (talk) 23:44, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * The Sacramento District Attorney team did the genetic genealogy analysis. Detectives are now doing many of the genetic genealogy analyses.

Adgqet (talk)
 * Thanks. I see how I got that wrong. The article I looked at did not mention how the the genealogical analysis was done.  But there was a quote from CeCe Moore of Parabon in the article so I wrongly assumed Parabon had done the analysis.SylviaStanley (talk) 06:32, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Marden Manor Park
Message for SylviaStanley Hi I am new to Wiki, so not sure if this is a good way to make contact, so hope you don't mind. I am writing a non profit book and would like to include this photo. My book covers the village Bletchingley surrey and the various Lords of the Manor. Sir Robert Clayton was Lord of the Manor of Bletchingley and built the house at Marden, as i'm sure you know. Would you be able to supply a higher resolution photo of painting and also do you know the history of it and the artist ? Yours is a lovely painting; the only other painting I know of is an 1822 one by John Hassell at the Surrey History Centre, Woking; but it is rather plain compared to yours.

Many Thanks - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 19:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message Dave.
 * I would like to help you but I'm not sure if I can very much.
 * The painting comes from a large book of paintings in memory of "Edward Marjoribanks of Greenlands, Bucks." Edward Marjoribanks (1776-1868) was a distant relative of my wife.  He was a partner in Coutts Bank.  The book is mostly a series of paintings of country houses in which he and his family appear to have stayed - probably for holiday periods.  My father-in-law (now deceased) bought the book from an antique shop many years ago.
 * Below the painting is written
 * "Marden Park, Surrey. The property of Sir William Clayton, rented by Edward Marjoribanks 1829 - a frightfully severe winter with very deep snow."
 * At the bottom right hand side of the painting there is a signature M. Conradi 1874. All of the paintings in the book were signed by M. Conradi who was presumably the artist. I found a couple of web pages (https://www.invaluable.com/artist/conradi-moritz-3wqdznllp4/sold-at-auction-prices/ ; https://www.askart.com/artist/Moritz_Conradi/11023768/Moritz_Conradi.aspx  ; https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-3822865) that mention a painter Moritz Conradi at that time so maybe that's him.  One page I found (http://www.wilnitsky.at/scripts/redgallery1.dll/details?No=32298) gave the following:
 * "Moritz Conradi was an English artist mentioned between 1840 and 1876. In 1840-1843 he studied at the Dresden Academy and, in 1844, attended the Berlin Academy. He mainly lived in London but also spent three years (1870-73) in Glasgow. Conradi exhibited from 1865 to 1876 at the London Royal Academy."
 * In the book "Family Business: A Memoir" by professor Peter J. Conradi (Seren, 2019;ISBN	9781781725023) Moritz Conradi is mentioned on pages 105-107. Moritz is described as a German Jew who was born in Germany in 1830, arrived in London in 1859 and died in Marylebone in 1887.  He seems to have been a reasonably successful painter in his day.  His miniatures of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, copied from daguerreotypes in 1861, were bought by Queen Victoria and still feature in the Royal Collection to this day.


 * I can upload another photo of the painting, which may be higher resolution, to Wikipedia if you like.SylviaStanley (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much for supplying this information. In my book I have tried to avoid being lazy and using images from the web, but in this case, its such a good picture compared to the only other one I have found. So now I can at least credit the original   source and artist. If you are able to upload a higher quality / resolution pic that would be great. I think the Iphone 4 resolution was quite low in the day, compared to more modern phones. You are obviously good with photography, as it a nice copy you have uploaded. I could probably get away with using the existing image but if you are able to upload one from a later phone or digital camera that would be fantastic. Many thanks - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 13:10, 24 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Incidently there is another painting called "Marden Park with hanging beech wood to the South 1829." I could add this too.  SylviaStanley (talk) 13:13, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure if there is a limit on file size uploads on Wiki ? Davehistoryprojects (talk) 13:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks sounds great. Davehistoryprojects (talk) 13:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Would it be correct that is a depiction of the house in 1829 but painted in 1874? Does the book have a publication date? Thanks again - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 13:36, 24 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes. The paintings commemorate the dates when Edward Marjoribanks and his family rented these country manor houses. But they were painted about 1869-1874.  I've never heard of Wikipedia having a maximum file upload size.  SylviaStanley (talk) 14:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Just wondered if you were able to upload a higher resolution picture of Marden Park. Kind Regards - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 15:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

PS I would love to see the other picture of Marden House you mentioned Davehistoryprojects (talk) 15:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes I uploaded a photo of the painting taken with my Iphone 6. Doesn't look like there's a big difference in resolution.  Yes I added a picture of the park too.SylviaStanley (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for all your help. They are of a slightly bigger file size so that is a help. It nice to see the hand written captions too. Again many many thanks - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 11:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

PS I noticed that above you mentioned Edward Marjoribanks (1776-1868), but on the image page, or some of them, you have (1776-1858). Are you able to confirm which is correct ? Thanks - Dave Davehistoryprojects (talk) 11:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my mistake. Should have been: born The Lees, Berwickshire 31 May 1778 died Greenlands, Bucks 17 Sep 1868. He is my wife's 6th cousin 5x removed.  Told you he was a very distant relative of my wife!SylviaStanley (talk) 14:30, 27 February 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) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)