This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from William John Seward Webber appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 December 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
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 Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
William John Seward Webber is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture 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.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles
How is the first paragraph of this section, with not a single source cited other than BMD and census records (synthesis/ original research), acceptable? The Glasgow University source gives sufficient detail of parentage and background, and doesn't rely on the potentially fallible selection of primary sources on the part of a contributor. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_primary_sources : "Many other primary sources, including birth certificates, the Social Security Death Index, and court documents, are usually not acceptable primary sources, because it is impossible for the viewer to know whether the person listed on the document is the notable subject rather than another person who happens to have the same name." Seems to speak for itself: a contributor can never be sure they've made the right selection. Secondary sources are needed to corroborate all the things NOT in the Glasgow source, such as mother's name, relatives' dates, etc etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.209.235 (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.JPG)
