This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Boxing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Boxing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BoxingWikipedia:WikiProject BoxingTemplate:WikiProject BoxingBoxing articles
I am surprised at the two reverts made after my attempts to clarify the details of the lead. The former (and now current version) was misleading and ambiguous. In addition, the style of St Mary's Church was incorrect (it should be St Mary's, not St Marys). I am not in the habit of participating in edit wars so will leave it for now - but would welcome other editor's comments on this.--Ipigott (talk) 08:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You ought not to be surprised, as you were incorrectly changing the sense of what's being said. It's by no means certain that Ned was the son of John and Mary Painter who was baptised at St Marys Church Stretford on 15 February 1784, he simply may have been. Thus "... and was possibly the son of John and Mary Painter who was baptised at St Marys Church Stretford on 15 February 1784" is entirely accurate, whereas your alternative offering of "He was baptised at St Mary's Church Stretford on 15 February 1784" is not. He may have been the baby baptised on that date, John and Mary's son, but then again he may not. EricCorbett10:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your explanations, Eric. I now realize that you really did intend to give the date and place of the baptism of his (possible) mother. However, now that I have looked at the ODNB entry which you quote, Painter himself could not have been baptized in February 1784 as he was born in March. I don't know where you found details of Mary Painter's baptism but if you wish to include this detail, I would suggest you reference it. I must say I was surprised to see such a detail in the lead, especially as if your version is correct, then I would very much doubt that Mary Painter was his mother. In 18th-century England, baptism virtually always took place within days or weeks of birth. There is indeed a record of the baptism of John Painter, son of John and Mary Painter, at Chorlton-cum Hardy, adjacent to Stretford, in April 1977 (see here), and so it might just be possible that Edward had an elder brother. But this is all guesswork and hardly worthy of a biographical account of a famous figure. I therefore suggest it should be removed from the lead and that summary details of Painter's boxing career be given instead. But I leave it entirely up to you.--Ipigott (talk) 06:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Where did you get the idea from that I was giving the date of baptism of Ned Painter's mother? I don't know what version of the ODNB you're reading, but nowhere in the current edition is it claimed that Ned Painter was born in March. EricCorbett12:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The lead itself, as currently written, states that Mary Painter was baptized at St Mary's Church Stretford on 15 February 1784. That is indeed the whole problem with the lead that needs to be rectified. We need to completely eliminate an ambiguity you probably never intended. The version of ODNB I am referring to is here. I realize it is an older version (c. 1904) but the date is clearly presented as March 1784. March is also mentioned here. --Ipigott (talk) 21:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It does not, at least not unless you have the reading age of an infant. And why should we prefer a 100-year-old version of the ODNB to the current one? EricCorbett21:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then let's just leave it as it is, although I am certainly not happy about the way it is expressed. I'm sorry to have upset you and to have taken up so much of your time.--Ipigott (talk) 07:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your recent edit on this. I am now happy with the way it has been expressed and understand that there is an element of doubt which has to be maintained. As I do not live in the UK, I cannot access the recent edition of the ODNE. The older version I consulted was apparently incorrect. I'm glad it's been sorted out but the earlier version did seem strange. --Ipigott (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
