User talk:RichardRowan

This is RichardRowan's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Morton Paye (April 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 -noah- was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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 User:Artdealer2021/sandbox/Richard Morton Paye 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 User:Artdealer2021/sandbox/Richard Morton Paye, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Noah ^💬 18:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Artdealer2021! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Noah ^💬 18:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Richard Morton Paye, from its old location at User:Artdealer2021/sandbox/Richard Morton Paye. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Artdealer2021! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Richard Morton Paye has been accepted

Richard Morton Paye, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:23, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Artdealer2021. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Pether

You've made some helpful edits, that I will return, but I reverted a chunk of your edits because they are unhelpful and resulted in the removal of cited content (a no-no without discussing it on the talk page).–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:50, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Carol. When you say "a chunk" of my edits are "unhelpful" can you be more specific please? I take your point regarding cited content but I only removed elements that I know to be erroneous. There is a considerable amount of misinformation regarding the Pether family and of course, the fact that stories and 'information' about a person (in this case these artists) appears elsewhere on line or in print does not make them true. Best regards, Gavin Artdealer2021 (talk) 02:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am almost done with the edits - just a bit more. And then I will summarize what I have not seen anywhere (I have read through 30 to 40 reliable sources - see WP:RS) that you have tried to add.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest no-nos were the deletion of cited content.
It is a huge no-no to replace cited content with uncited content. For instance, I only have one source for his date of birth: February 1800 - based upon his obit. The only other years of birth that I have seen are 1828, which is clearly wrong / a misunderstanding of the 1828-1865 date range
There is some other content that you removed that I agreed with and some cases where I introduced some compromises in the first paragraph of Life and work.
"Life and work" IS a correct heading. See MOS:SECTIONHEAD.
It's not proper to enter "th" etc for dates of birth and death.

--- I am going to double-check if there's anything I missed.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see - you didn't want Moonlight Pethers sentence eliminated, just the dupe - I removed it from the body and added the citations to the lead per WP:CITELEAD–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:37, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the diff between the way the article looked when you started looking at it - and after I picked up some of your edits or provided compromises. For instance, the descriptions of Henry and Sebastian's style helps analyze the different between their works. So, I would like to leave that in - but you might have a better way of saying it. I also added the edits I tried to make when I got edit conflicts. So, it's caught up-to-date with my take on both of our edits. What do you think? Where did you find the date of birth of 8 February 1801?–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Carol. No, I only removed the second and third repeat references to 'Moonlight Pather(s)'. I do not believe there is a reliable source for Henry Pether's birth date, just to his christening which took place on February 10th 1801. 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:8148:AD54:A73E:A5E7 (talk) 04:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Gavi :), Hmmm re: the christening. We could add that... do you have a link to a source? What town was it in? I couldn't find a good source for his birthplace.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just made one tiny grammatical alteration as you will see. Re. the date of christening - yes, it is from Ancestry.com. How do I forward this to you. I can't just send you a link as it is a subscription website. We could also correct his brother Sebastian's date of birth while we at at it! He is erroneous listed as having been born in 1790 but in actual fact he was born on 24th November 1793 and christened on 31st August 1874. Again I have scans from Ancestry. Gavin 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:8148:AD54:A73E:A5E7 (talk) 04:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you copy what is in "Source"? It may be that "Original" data/source is good enough, but sometimes it's also helpful to have the name of the index and the applicable years. We cannot use the link to ancestry, but we can describe the source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a recent example for info I got from ancestry: <ref name="Index">{{citation|title=H. Michael Marquardt | work=Index to Public Records, 1994-2019. Original data: Voter Registration Lists, Public Record Filings, Historical Residential Records, and Other Household Database Listings }}</ref>–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Artdealer2021 (talk) 04:25, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, re: brother's dates. I did some searching and I couldn't find anything other than 1790.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the screen shots. It looks like I have what I need to update Sebastian's article. Can you open up the christening record for Henry and provide a screenshot? Then, I will have the info needed for that update.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I made the change for Sebastian's birth and baptism, but the burial record shows his name as John Thomas Sebastian Pether, age 51 - the age is right, but the name if different. His full birth name is shown as Sebastian William Thomas Pether. There is a secondary source already in the article which makes sense - he died on March 14. The burial record shows John Thomas Sebastian Pether was buried on March 25th, which seems a bit odd as well. So, I think it's best to leave the death/burial info alone. How does that work for you?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks excellent Carol. I agree about Sebastian. And, the Henry Pether baptism record has a different first name for the father - so - again, best left undisturbed. Thank you again for your guidance and hard work. Best regards, Gavin 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:4DA8:197:45FC:5A69 (talk) 18:40, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I also made a few edits to Sebastian's article. If I remember correctly, there weren't many inline citations for Abraham's article, so I will work on that next. Please feel free to copy edit the Pethers' articles - you have a nice flair for the written word!–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Carol. That's 20 years as a producer, writer and director in TV and film for you! Another life now. G 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:C1B:89F0:2436:A95D (talk) 21:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Hello, I'm CaroleHenson. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Henry Pether, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. –CaroleHenson (talk) 02:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Henry Pether, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. –CaroleHenson (talk) 02:54, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Henry Pether, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Disruptive editing in this case means removal of well-cited information. This should be discussed on the article talk page first. See WP:BRD. –CaroleHenson (talk) 02:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should have added; yes, you are correct I am quite new to doing this so my apologies for my lack of understanding of Wikipedia regs etc. Gavin 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:8148:AD54:A73E:A5E7 (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's cool. I am betting there are still places to tidy up. It would be good to have your input on that. Regarding things you "know" but don't have a source for, that's tricky. You have to have a source. In some cases, though, I have added uncited notes to help clear up otherwise clear bits of info (meaning there has to be some foundation). I hope that makes sense.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does Carol. Thank you for your help. Much appreciated. Gavin 2A02:C7F:60A3:4600:8148:AD54:A73E:A5E7 (talk) 04:04, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Thanks for bearing with me. I remember how overwhelming it can be to get a list of a whole bunch of guidelines! It's the only way I can think of to best explain the issues.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Next...

I thought I would check in with you about some next steps, if you are interested. I made a couple of minor changes to Richard Morton Paye and would be happy to insert inline citations for that article.

It may be the best approach if you have a conflict of interest. Do you have any thoughts about some next steps?

It would be wise to change your username - while still following the steps in the conflict of interest section above.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I take your point about my username. I don't feel as though I have a conflict of interests - my intention is always to amend inaccuracies and add new and (in my opinion) important information where it is lacking, especially with regard to artists I believe have been traditionally under-appreciated and/or whose biographies are often full of apocryphal hearsay. I did just check and it says I need to provide a reason for changing my username. What would you advise me to put? Thanks Carol. G Artdealer2021 (talk) 16:38, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. My thought is to say that you will not write or edit articles about painters that you have in your collection / group of paintings for sale.

Regarding my other question, are you selling paintings by Paye?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carole. I am happy to keep my username as I will ensure there is no conflict of interests. Following your guidance I will only add or edit factual information with credits and citations. It seems ludicrous that I would be dissuaded from adding valuable information to wikipedia because I might own or be selling a painting by any particular artist. What happens in the future if I have a painting by Henry Pether? Surely no one would suggest that I delete all the work I put in assembling his wiki page? Best, G Artdealer2021 (talk) 11:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's really all about whether there is a conflict of interest and content with peacock and promotion type language. I personally don't have a problem with it as long as the content is added with an objective point of view. It's possible, though, that the content might be tagged by someone else. I guess that won't happen as long as it is factual information that anyone might add. I hope that makes sense.

Leaving your username as-is is an inherent means of announcing that you are an art dealer, so it seems to me that communicates your background for others without needing to announce it on the talk page.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William Breakspeare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RBA. 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) 18:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]