Jump to content

Talk:Berney baronets

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

Citing searches

[edit]

Citations should be to a specific article or publication, not to a search result on a search site. Searches can at any moment return different results for the same query. Use them to find a link or bibliographic data for a source, then cite the source, not the search. DES (talk) 01:01, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

source issues

[edit]

Currently, the following citations all link to searches rather than to documents.

  • No 3: "Burke's Peerage 107th Edition - Berney (Baronets)". Search on Henry Dubs Middleton, Page 494. Retrieved 6 October 2015.
  • No 4: "The Late Mr H. D. Middleton / Middleton and Sons Leeds". ( via Genes reunited) 24 June 1933 and also 9 January 1907 Yorkshire :Evening Post West Yorkshire, England. Retrieved 4 October 2015
  • No 8: "Burke's Peerage Second World War Edition". Copyright © 1995–2015 Burke’s Peerage All rights reserved Listing number: 132,013 - Page number 126.
  • No 9: "Will of Mr. A. Middleton, Leeds". Leeds Mercury. 20 June 1907.
  • No 10: "OBITUARY. Sir Henry Hanson Berney, Bart". Manchester Courier and Lancashire General Advertiser Greater Manchester, England - 28 February 1907

The following have other issues:

  • No 5: "University College Oxford". University College Oxford. Retrieved 4 October 2015 This links to a list of archived papers, wich does not directly support the stated facts.

This article needs serious improvement in its citations. DES (talk) 21:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC) Citations should not link to searches. Neither should they include copyright notices in the citation text, nor website design credits. DES (talk) 21:55, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Berney baronets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 9th Baronet was grandfather of a cricketer

[edit]

Perhaps so, but WP:PROPORTION. This is not a noteworthy aspect of an account of a baronetcy, that one of their daughters gave birth to a cricketer. This appears actually to be an attempt to shoehorn someone else named Middleton into the article, but such indirect connections carry no weight. Find for me a WP:RS account (along the lines of Cokayne) of the Berney baronets where the author thinks it is noteworthy that one of them had a daughter who was mother of a cricketer and its inclusion would be unquestionably noteworthy, otherwise it's noteworthiness is based solely on an editor liking it, and that isn't good enough, because being related to a cricketer is not really relevant to an account of a title in the Baronetage of England, the subject of this page (as described in the lede). Agricolae (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the Lady Henrietta Neville is referenced, because she has her own page. This is not "shoehorning". I see that the reference to Jane Dorothy Middleton nee Berney is well researched and obviously relevant; the Leeds Photographic Archives also reference her and her son Cecil who has his own page. This is entirely understandable and makes sense. 175.33.49.35 (talk) 10:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The subject of this article is not the Berney family, it is about the baronets. Hence it is a failure of perspective for the 9th baronet not to even be the subject of the only sentence that refers to him in an article about the bearers of his title. In what sense is the hobby of a grandson of more value than a single biographical detail about the 9th baronet himself, or for that matter the 7th and the 10th, who also just have their place in the succession stated? We give no other daughters of any of the other 9 baronets, no other grandsons, and we don't even describe the leisure activities of any of those baronets, yet here we just have to tell the reader that the widow of the 9th baronet had a grandson who golfed? No, completely out of proportion. Agricolae (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:21, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Berney_baronets&oldid=1199898928"