Jump to content

User talk:Southdevonian

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Southdevonian, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:58, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:TurkeySmart.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeySmart.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Help_desk#Picture

[edit]

I've fixed the formatting on the picute in the article and commented at the help desk, the JPG part of the tag needed to be caps(case sensitive), regards -Dureo (talk) 11:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel M'Naghten

[edit]

Thanks for the help, glad to see somebody finally tackling that biography as it's been in sore need of some extension for years now and I've never found the time. Even more glad to see it's apparently one of Wikipedia's "valued newbies" contributing to the project so thoroughly. Welcome, and thanks! Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 15:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prinsep's daughter(s)

[edit]

Thanks for your kind message about the Prinsep entry. I'll have to go back to my sources on this one, and it may take me a little while to do that. In the meantime, I wanted to acknowledge your message and let you know that I'm looking into it. Best regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:WrenCambridge.JPG missing description details

[edit]
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:WrenCambridge.JPG is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:51, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grave of Nat Flatman.JPG missing description details

[edit]
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Grave of Nat Flatman.JPG is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Welneyvillagesign.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Spencer Perceval

[edit]

Thank you very much for your edit. I had long loved Henry Adams's paraphrase of Smith, but now we've got the original. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 15:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
I hereby award this barnstar to editor Southdevonian for excellent work improving our Kett's Rebellion article. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well done Southdevonian. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

[edit]

Hi Sd. Re your last edit [1] - the chronology now seems to jump back from 1st August to 24th July? Is that correct? I don't have any sources to hand, so it's hard for me to confirm. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks okay to me. Have I missed a stray July?Southdevonian (talk) 21:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right. Perhaps "By 8 am the following morning .." could be "By 8 am the following morning, 1 August, .." ? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaving the Attacks section for the time being and am going to work on Aftermath and Legacy sections. I am slightly worried about the Attacks section. It was all added by someone who didn't log in or didn't have an account and they don't seem to have edited anything else Special:Contributions/80.229.11.145. They didn't provide any sources and I am worried it might have been copied from somewhere.Southdevonian (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited William Bryant (convict), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aborigines (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your work on Marjory Stephenson - it's always a delight to see a major expansion like this! Andrew Gray (talk) 11:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guessed that might be the case - someone created another article after the BBC ran a news story on the event this morning, too :-)
We're still pulling together a list of possible subjects for the session, but I'll let you know when it's up on the wiki in case any of the others catch your interest! If you've any suggestions for who should be in it, let me know and I'll throw them into the mix... Andrew Gray (talk) 17:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I dropped a note at WP:COMP about this, also linked to from talk pages of WP:WMNHIST, WP:ENGINEERING and WP:SCIENCE. -- Trevj (talk) 09:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mary Buckland

[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Marjory Stephenson

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Marjory Stephenson at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! LauraHale (talk) 21:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Marjory Stephenson

[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Hamilton (diplomat), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frederick Hervey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:22, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

[edit]

Your upload of File:Brown & Goodman's Mill.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Assassination of Spencer Perceval

[edit]

This is a notification to all the recent PR contributors that the above article is now at FAC. Comments welcomed there. Brianboulton (talk) 23:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Skaters meadow.JPG listed for discussion

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Skaters meadow.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 10:05, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Southdevonian. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion pending for File:Skaters meadow.JPG

[edit]

Hello, Southdevonian. Some time ago, a file you uploaded — File:Skaters meadow.JPG — was tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to [email protected]. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.

  • If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to [email protected] and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 15:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Southdevonian. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Southdevonian. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Foinavon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kempton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anglesey Abbey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hyacinth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tiger Roll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bryan Cooper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ida Darwin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regius Professor of Physic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Buick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Masked Marvel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Christopher Biden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blackheath.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Phil Heckels for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phil Heckels 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Heckels 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.

Mccapra (talk) 07:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Phoebe Waller-Bridge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vogue.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Egan (jockey), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albany Stakes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity...

[edit]

I wanted to know how things are handled here - usually I'm around the German Wikipedia. Last week I added a source to John Nichols Thom and you reverted it because as you wrote there's no need for an EBSCO login to an already referenced text. I would agree of course but the text I added has not previously been referenced here and I couldn't find another source apart from the EBSCO one. I'd love to learn so: could you explain to me if you'd still delete it and why? Thank you! Sheila 141.20.82.167 (talk) 09:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sheila. I don't quite understand - you did not actually add any text to the article. Unless I missed something? As far as I could see, you just added a reference where there was no need for one because the existing text was already referenced.
In general in Wikipedia Secondary sources are preferred to primary sources. So for example in the John Nichols Thom article the main sources are books. The events in which Thom was involved were major news at the time and so there were many newspaper articles (primary sources). It might be worth quoting from a newspaper article if it contained something that was not covered in the books but I think this would be unlikely as the authors of the books researched their subject thoroughly. I imagine (cannot be sure as I do not have access to the volume) that the article in The Christian Messenger and Repository of Religious, Political, and General Intelligence, for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick was copied from a British newspaper and so it would be better to quote from the British version if there was anything worth adding.Southdevonian (talk) 17:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your explanation! That explains some things to me I was not aware of (e.g. the preference of secondary over primary sources). And I'm really happy that you answered because I actually want to learn these things. So: Thanks again! - Sheila 141.20.82.167 (talk) 15:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Southdevonian. Thank you for your work on Editha Knocker. User:Razer2115, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Interesting Read. Thanks for creating the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Razer2115}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Razer(talk) 12:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Crisp (horse), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Salah Abdeslam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page VRT.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

  • adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
  • comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
  • follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
  • comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
  • refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

[edit]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Juan Branco shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Bbb23 (talk) 23:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nemov (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

[edit]

I suggest you strike D Lazard from your accusation of being an SPA in your statement at ANI as it is clearly inaccurate; see that editor's edit history. He has been editing wikipedia for years and has ten times the number of edits that you do. You might feel his edits are on one particular side of an issue, but that does not make the account an SPA. Schazjmd (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was forgetting he does maths as well. Will rephrase.Southdevonian (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kenneth Grahame, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cranbourne.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Omid Scobie

[edit]

Information icon Hi Southdevonian! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Omid Scobie several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Omid Scobie, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. - LouisOrr27 (talk) 01:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who inserts the tabloid material with an account and two (or more) different IP addresses has already been blocked from the page as far as the IP addresses are concerned and the account is being investigated. Southdevonian (talk) 09:59, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit warring

[edit]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. RudolfRed (talk) 05:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hi Southdevonian. Thank you for your work on Dylan Browne McMonagle. Another editor, Bastun, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Nice work on your new article. It should be added to appropriate WikiProjects, such as Biography.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bastun: Thank you. I have added a couple of projects. All ready for if he wins the Epsom Derby on Saturday! Southdevonian (talk) 13:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Mosley

[edit]

Died 5 June 2024 [2]https://www.iefimerida.gr/ellada/symi-brethike-o-paroysiastis-toy-bbc 2A02:587:CC0C:FC00:CD1C:C63B:587D:54D2 (talk) 09:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Chance to Consider recent changes to Spencer Perceval article

[edit]

@Southdevonian I have been notified that you have reverted some recent edits that I made regarding the article Spencer Perceval due to unsupported or unbased sources. Please don’t take this as a offence, but I have to reach a point of understanding between both of us regarding this issue without it getting into a dispute. The reason for this issue was that I could get some sources wrong because in certain situations, because while doing research and reading information on certain topics I could misleadingly (not intentionally) mix up a couple of sources here and there. It is difficult already when you are reading whole articles and book abstracts, then have to re-align with facts and information to be written in an appropriate way. So I ask you that you restore the reverted edits temporarily until I find the necessary sources. It would be very obnoxious to undo your edits out of frustration and overrule your statements regarding major errors. I hope that we could cooperate together as a team in this case. Thank you. Davecorbray (talk) 16:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it had just been a couple of sources that got mixed up, I would happily have sorted them out. I spend quite a lot of my time on Wikipedia fixing references and supplying sources. But when I came to look at your additions I noticed a pattern emerging: a passage of text that reads more like an essay is followed by a reference to a random academic article. Nearly all of them don't even mention Perceval (or the period of his premiership) and certainly don't support the text you added. I think it would be a good idea, if you want to work on the article, to keep to sources that are actually about Perceval or at least contain a significant amount of relevant material. It is always up to the editor who inserts text to supply the sources. Southdevonian (talk) 17:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the thing here is that, you reverted edits that might specifically mention him. So like in the Attorney General section or legal career. It does not require to directly mention him as far as I know. If you are indeed aware of the time period or history in which he lives, that should be counted as containing links to Perceval, since he lived during that time. So it is a bit odd that since you are someone who only fix references and sources (no offence), you should consider at least knowing that although some of the sources doesn’t mention him directly, at least the history about the period between 1790 and 1806 alludes more significantly to his own reference in any way. So again I ask you that you kindly consider undoing your previous reverts. This information is indeed important to any reader who is interested. Thank you again. Davecorbray (talk) 17:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: when I said "I spend quite a lot of my time on Wikipedia fixing references and supplying sources" I meant that I spend part (not all) of my Wiki-time fixing refs and supplying sources. I also copy edit and create content.Southdevonian (talk) 09:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Davecorbray, I think you might be unclear as to how sourcing requirements on Wikipedia differ from academic expectations. For a Wikipedia article, you should only summarize what reliable sources have already said; you can't extrapolate sources about that period to make claims specifically about Perceval (see WP:OR). For example, in your first paragraph, you write:

Perceval’s tenure coincided with a period of considerable social unrest, characterised by widespread dissatisfaction with economic conditions and the influence of radical ideas emanating from the French Revolution. This was applied particularly for his rigorous enforcement of laws against sedition, his efforts to suppress publications that incited public disorder and his prosecution of members of the United Britons and United Irishmen.[1]

The sentence that starts "This was applied particularly for his rigorous enforcements..." is making a claim specifically about Perceval (not about the time period) and your source doesn't mention Perceval, French Revolution, sedition, United Britons, or United Irishmen. You need a source that specifically talks about Perceval's enforcement of laws against sedition...efforts to suppress publications...prosecutions of... to support that sentence. (The sentence is also ambiguous: this was applied doesn't make sense; what was applied? The preceding sentence gives no noun that works with applied.)
You might find it helpful to read the policy on verifiability. It begins: In the English Wikipedia, verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than editors' beliefs, opinions, experiences, or previously unpublished ideas or information. Even if you are sure something is true, it must have been previously published in a reliable source before you can add it. When you add content citing a source that does not explicitly support the content that you are adding, you are violating that policy, and it casts doubt on all of your edits when other editors see that you are adding unverified content. I hope this helps.

References

  1. ^ Rosecrance, Richard; Lo, Chih-Cheng (1996). "Balancing, Stability, and War: The Mysterious Case of the Napoleonic International System". International Studies Quarterly. 40 (4): 479–500. doi:10.2307/2600888. ISSN 0020-8833.

Schazjmd (talk) 18:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the text does not come from the sources, then where does it come from? Is it AI generated? Southdevonian (talk) 22:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent reverts

[edit]

@Southdevonian I have witnessed recently that you are reverting edits that I made more than a month ago, back when I didn’t either use ChatGPT or any AI-generated content. This is unfairly being removed on the grounds of AI-generated text, which is not true. I wrote those words in Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle and Charles Watson-Wentworth, 2nd Marquess of Rockingham on my own and this is unjustified despite your justification being it’s “AI-generated”. Please don’t revert edits that you yourself have no idea whether or not it’s AI or my own. This is not a threat or warning, I just don’t want someone removing edits that I made last month for apparently a mistake that I made while using a certain language and sources. For which, I apologised. The wholesome removal of valuable information is something I can’t stand. Please do not take this sort of action just because of your personal feelings and suspicions. Please reverse your course and restore the information that I made on my own without any “AI”. Davecorbray (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading accusations and false claims are not a way to engage in disputes

[edit]

@Southdevonian I have tried to engage with you in a civil manner and resolve this issue altogether without any major problems. But now I feel more and more threatened and uncomfortable about the fact that you deliberately or unknowingly have been trying to sabotage me and my work relentlessly by reverting my edits. Your accusations does not address the fact you are removing old information from articles that I have made by weaponising a mistake that I made a week ago. This will inevitably cause some serious consequences in the future for you in the future ahead I’m afraid. Davecorbray (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davecorbray

[edit]

I see that Davecorbray has now been indeffed. No surprise there. I'm not a historian, but I suspect that his other contributions need to be reverted – my quick look at John Russell, 1st Earl Russell convinced me that they can't be trusted. Maproom (talk) 15:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Maproom: . I will work my way through them. ChatGPT definitely needs to brush up on its history. Southdevonian (talk) 17:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A question

[edit]

I'm curious. In this edit, you changed the text so that instead of saying that the person "is the co-founder of Autonomy Corporation", it says they are "known as the co-founder of Autonomy Corporation". What motivated that change? 131.251.10.15 (talk) 09:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I probably just wanted to join two short sentences, while following the instructions in MOS:BIO for contents of first sentence including "One, or possibly more, noteworthy positions, activities, or roles that the person is mainly known for, avoiding subjective or contentious terms". Do you think it reads ambiguously - suggesting that he isn't really the co-founder of Autonomy? I will change it back - no problem. Southdevonian (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It just struck me as a decidedly odd way to phrase a factual statement, and one that introduced many ambiguities and uncertainties. Like, known to who? And would would even know who knows such things? And indeed, does it imply that he wasn't actually the co-founder? So I just wondered if there was some particular reason to want to phrase it that way. Thanks for your answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.251.10.15 (talk) 20:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of a CSD tag an admin declined

[edit]

In reviewing a request at WP:REFUND, specifically in regards to Premiership of Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool, I noticed that you reverted @Asilvering's decline of the G5 CSD tag (diff for admins). If an admin declines a CSD tag you do not re-add the same CSD tag and hope another admin comes along to process it, that's inappropriate and considered WP:ADMINSHOPPING. I understand it resulted in deletion this time, which I actually very much disagree with after looking at the edit history, but in the future, please do not restore CSD tags that have been declined by admins. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Southdevonian&oldid=1258267140"