User talk:Whathojeeves

Some of your edits
Hi Whathojeeves, I hope you are well. Concern has been expressed that some of your edits may breach Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy. Please could you read through the policy and try to ensure that you keep to it - you may find better citation of sources helpful too, as good citations always improve an article and make your edits less likely to be reverted by others. If you want to suggest changes to an article that are or may be controversial then it's a good idea to raise them on the article's talk page first, giving other editors a chance to contribute and reach a concensus as to the best way forward. I do hope this is helpful to you and that you continue to contribute and to enjoy your time on Wikipedia. DuncanHill 12:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm passing fair, thank you, Duncan. Since I've been careful to confine my comments to presenting facts, the person(s) expressing concern have no need to do so. I'll therefore make a point, as I get the hang of the system, of providing suitable references. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to restrain those with an axe to grind from reverting unwelcome facts with gay abandon.Whathojeeves 16:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I have reverted an edit of yours to the Philip Payton article, as it appears to me to be POV and potentially defamatory. It also appears to me to be unsupported by the (useful and welcome) link to Payton's article. I think a link to Payton's article would benefit the WP article - but that your characterization of its contents is not in a suitable form for a Wikipedia article. When I read the link, I got the impression of someone calling for more effective attempts at revival, and suggesting ways in which this could be attempted. If you have references to criticism of Payton then I think it would be perfectly acceptable to quote the criticism with citations, eg. in a "Criticism" section. Basically, the article itself should not criticise its subject, but can of course quote criticism (and support) of his work by third parties. I feel I must say that I am writing this from a monoglot English perspective - alas I know only a few odd words of Cornish, and am certainly in no position to comment on the merits of the different revived systems. I do think of myself as a "Friend of Cornwall" - having grown up amongst, and always been made most welcome by, the Cornish I feel I have, perhaps, a better understanding than most Englishpeople of the special nature of Cornwall's cultural, historical and economic situation and special status. I also feel that you are someone with much to contribute to Wikipedia, but that perhaps sometimes the strength of your convictions may make you a little "over-zealous" in some of your edits - I hope you accept that this is meant as "friendly criticism" - and that you continue to contribute to WP. DuncanHill 21:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Would just like to add that I now find the article in Cornish Studies is not by Payton, but by Deacon - please see this link to the Exeter Uni site hosting the pdf - DuncanHill 23:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest, Duncan, I'll check it out. Whathojeeves 21:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Just checked. It's an accurate statement of fact, and would not be defamatory anyway. So not to worry. Whathojeeves 21:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Authenticism
Out of courtesy, I feel I should let you know that the article Authenticism has been nominated for deletion, the debate is being carried out here Articles for deletion/Authenticism. DuncanHill 22:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Duncan, I've just spotted it. I'm not sure that 'debate' isn't an over-generous term, but no matter. What *would* be worrying is if Everson gets away with this. Whathojeeves 23:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, it wasn't me who attributed Bernard's article to PP - but thanks for the correction! Whathojeeves 00:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Neologisms
For your information please read Avoid neologisms. DuncanHill 00:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip - but not relevant here. It's not a neologism, and in fact I'm supporting its use as opposed to some of the far less neutral terms in common circularion. Whathojeeves 22:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

New Articles
Hi again, it's really good to see you creating new articles and improving WP's coverage of Cornish culture.

You've probably noticed that I've started putting them into categories. You can find the full list of Cornish categories at Category:Cornwall. To add an article to a category, all you have to do is type at the bottom of the article in the edit screen, where "categoryname" is the name of the category the article should be in. It's also good to cite sources for your articles - don't worry too much about using inline references (I've only just started getting the hang of them!), but having a section at the bottom of an article headed ==Sources== will help other editors, and will also help stop an article being deleted. It's especially good to use sources from eg. newspapers to establish "notability" - again, this will help stop your work being deleted. For example, in an article about a poet, a quote from, say, the Western Morning News, or The Cornishman, describing him as "a major Cornish poet" or "one of the leading poets of the Cornish language" would be a good start to establishing what Wikipedia calls notability. If you have a book citing the subject of your article, then including the ISBN number is also helpful, as with some browsers editors can simply click on the ISBN number, and be taken to the Amazon.com listing of the book.

I do hope these few tips are helpful, and please do ask if you would like a hand with formatting, categories or anything else like that. Best wishes, DuncanHill 23:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Very helpful indeed! My plan is to put in the beginnings of articles on elements of Cornish culture not always familiar to people elsewhere. Thanks for the point about sources. Since much of my information derives from personal research, I shall be holding some articles back until I can nail down some generally-accessible source or other. Whathojeeves 20:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:ARTICLE has some more tips to help you develop your articles. DuncanHill 00:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Fore Street
Hope you like the development of the article that you started. Vernon White - TALK PAGE  17:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Like it very much indeed. Have you any idea when the custom of naming thoroughfares 'Fore Street' originated? Did it go overseas - e.g. are there any 'Fore Streets' in Australia, New Zealand, California, etc? Whathojeeves 20:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See article. You will see that there are some in the North of England and Scotland but mostly in the SW, especially Cornwall. There's one in Portland, Maine but I haven't checked overseas street map sources, perhaps you would like to . . . try http://www.multimap.com for a start ... Vernon White . . . Talk 15:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll follow this up, a bit at a time. I hope that the chronology will emerge - how did the name emerge and spread? Must admit I'd always taken it for granted - as we do so often! Whathojeeves 20:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Haldreyn
A template has been added to the article Haldreyn, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. —  iride scent   (talk to me!)  02:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. As deletion proposals seem to follow the same inevitable course as an accusation of witchcraft, I don't think I'll bother, thanks. Whathojeeves 20:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I removed the prod, but I do feel the article needs expansion to better assert notability. DuncanHill 21:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I gather the Gorseth has published a new reference book. It'll be easier to dig up some more gen. Whathojeeves 23:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalising the cornish language article
Whathojeeves, you will of course be familiar with WP:POINT and WP:POV? I have reverted your vandalism to Cornish Language. If you keep at it, doubtless you'll receive an editing block or ban from an admin. --feline1 (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have an eccentric definition of vandalism! Your fear that I might be banned doesn't however,seem to have been fulfilled. Thank you, nevertheless, for your concern on my behalf.Whathojeeves (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Whathojeeves! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Haldreyn -
 * 2) Donald Rawe -

Nomination of List of settlements with a Fore Street for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of settlements with a Fore Street is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of settlements with a Fore Street until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Rschen7754 01:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)