User talk:JanetFizzCurtis

Welcome!

Hi JanetFizzCurtis! 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! Kleuske (talk) 15:57, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Irene Mawer

Hi. Your draft is shaping up to be a fine article. The only problem I have are the sections Ginner-Mawer Alumni and Associates, which really aren't very germane to the subject and take up a lot of space just dropping names and professions. I think you should cut down on those substantially. Good luck. Kleuske (talk) 11:58, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah-ha. At last, I have found a way to reply. Gosh! This Wikipedia thing takes some getting used to, doesn’t it? Thank you for your input. It’s good to get feedback at an early stage and I am glad to know it before submission. It will save time and disappointment. I would be grateful for any other pointers that will help for the submission to be accepted. Cheers. JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 20:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am stuck, please can you help. I still don’t understand how to use this discussion or talk section correctly. Somewhere on here is a thread, or possibly two, where I have asked for permission to use a particular image and I am awaiting a decision. I haven’t heard anything for a few days and I can’t find my way back to the discussion. Please could you help me to find out whether or not a decision has been made on the use of my image? Thank you. Also, I am ready to submit my article - do you have any comments for me before I do so. Thanks. JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 12:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Irene Mawer has been accepted

Irene Mawer, 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 B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! 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!

— The Most Comfortable Chair 15:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Theatre Barnstar
		For writing this wonderful Wikipedia article — Irene Mawer! You have done a splendid job writing about one of the more underappreciated figures in the history of performance arts, and it was my pleasure reviewing and accepting your draft to the article-space. — The Most Comfortable Chair 15:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On a separate note, I saw you that you were not able to find the deletion discussion regarding Mawer's image. I found it and it is right here — Commons:Deletion requests/File:Irene Mawer.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Irene_Mawer.jpg If you have any questions or need help, I will be glad to assist you. — The Most Comfortable Chair 15:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello The Most Comfortable Chair (the most unusual name I have ever encountered!).

A MASSIVE THANK YOU to you for your wonderful words of encouragement and for accepting the wiki page that I wrote. I apologise for the delay in responding to you; the reason is that the news arrived the day before my 60th birthday. What a birthday gift that was! I don’t know which event I celebrated more - the Wiki page or the special birthday.

Thank you for the Barnstar. I didn’t know what it was, so I looked it up. I feel honoured, lol. More especially, I am overwhelmed at the B-Class rating. I find the Wiki instructions extremely confusing and I didn’t know if my entry would be accepted or not. I have looked to how to attain the next grade (I think it is GA?) but am no clearer on how to proceed. II would be very grateful if you could advise me on which areas I need to address. I am willing to put the work in, but I don’t know where I need to improve.

Also, thank you for the link back to the discussion about the image that I wanted to use. I am no further forward as I can not see what the decision is. I would like to use the image but am very confused as to how to go forward with it.

Many, many thanks for your response. If you have the time, I would love your help to improve this article. Best wishes JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 17:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you had a lovely celebration and my belated birthday wishes to you! Navigating through Wikipedia interface can feel overwhelming; I would know because I struggled too when I started out.

For an article to be promoted to the GA-class, it needs to go through the process of good article nominations — in a nutshell:

Once you feel like you have improved your article to a point where you feel confident that it could be a GA, you nominate your article.
It will then be reviewed by an independent volunteer who has no connections to the topic.
During the review, the reviewer may suggest some ways to improve your article further, and you will need to respond to that.
Afterwards, if the reviewer is satisfied with your response and implementation of suggested improvements, they will promote your article

Now about the work Irene Mawer needs, in my understanding, to get to the point where you can confidently nominate it for GA evaluation. A good way to begin your process would be to go through a few existing GAs to get a sense of what a GA should look like — for current GAs relevant to your topic, you should see Good articles/Media and drama. Then, your article will need to meet the good article criteria. With respect to Irene Mawer, there are a few things that you should work on before nominating. Here is what I found:

The lead is a little too brief, and does not summarize the article (cover all major aspects of the article). To get an idea for what should be in a good lead, you can see this one article I worked on; I paid special attention to get the lead right — William B. Jordan. Alternatively, I can help you write a lead in summary style, similar to Jordan's article if you would want me to.
There are some sentences and paragraphs that do not have a citation. Ideally, every fact you state or topic you cover needs to have a citation. For instance, "Irene Mawer was the youngest of six children and survived her parents and all of her siblings" has no citation at the end of the sentence/paragraph.
References have incomplete information. For instance, reference 40 — "Dancing Times, December 1936" — does not have an article title or page number (or volume and issue numbers, if it can have them). Every reference, at minimum, should include a title, name of the newspaper/journal/magazine/book, date of publication, and page number (if applicable). For journal and magazine sources, the volume and issue numbers are required (unless they do not have them).
There are a lot of Manual of Style (MoS) problems. This is something that I can and would love to help you with. I have some experience with the process — I have worked on improving 7 articles to GA status (2 solo and 5 collaborations), and I have independently reviewed around 45 GA nominations (e.g. Edita Gruberová/GA1). We can collaborate on your article, that is — if you can address the content issues I mentioned above, I can help you fix the lead, MoS and formatting problems (it would be quicker and much more efficient if I worked on them directly instead of listing each and every one of them individually).

About the image discussion — we will have to wait for the commons thread to come to a close, if we want to use that picture. I read on the discussion that her relatives are okay with releasing that photograph in the public domain. If so, you can use {{PD-heirs}}, if you can acquire written consent of her legal heirs. Alternatively, if you have a photograph of yourself with Irene Mawer (or of just Irene Mawer with or without other people) in your ownership, you can upload that using {{PD-user}}.

I am here to help, so please don't hesitate to ask questions. I would love to work with you on getting this article to GA-status. — The Most Comfortable Chair 10:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. What a lovely response. Thank you. Yes, I will work on this, and yes please, I would like your help. I will do as much as I possibly can myself, and then take you up on your offer of ironing out the creases once I have got as far as I can on my own. I will now go and digest your message and do the relevant research and I will come back to you in due course. Cheers. JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 14:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you have fun! When you are done, you can reply here or drop me a note on my talk page. Good luck! — The Most Comfortable Chair 17:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello The Most Comfortable Chair. I am still finding navigation of the whole Wiki thing extremely difficult. Not to worry - I will get there in the end. I can’t tell from the chain of discussion events whether or not you had anything to do with a decision being made regarding the image, but if you did, then ‘thank you’. I was so excited when I realised the image was there. I haven’t made any improvements to the page info just yet. It will be a while, but I will get there. I like to get everything correct, so it won’t be a rush job. Thank you for your support and I will be in touch at some point in the future :-) JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 10:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rush at all :) By the way, Wikipedia is astronomically more difficult to edit if you are using a phone, and editing Wikipedia is much much much easier and so much more intuitive on a computer or laptop because the interface is completely different and better. And yes — I found that {{PD-UK-unknown}} is applicable to your uploaded file, which means that the photograph is in the public domain in the UK. Once we have established that, it formed the basis for deriving that the photograph was also highly likely to be in the public domain in the US because of {{PD-US-not renewed}} — therefore, freely usable on Wikipedia and its projects. — The Most Comfortable Chair 12:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear The Most Comfortable Chair.

You were kind enough to assist me with my Irene Mawer page, so I wonder if you could possibly help me again, please? I have been emailed by one of my contacts in Canada who has noticed that the citations referencing his work have disappeared and have been replaced with ‘citation needed’ messages.

I haven’t attempted to simply re-instate the citation as I am guessing there must be a reason why this has happened and I should sort the problem at the root first. Could you help me to understand what happened, please, and let me know how I can rectify the problem?

Many thanks, Janet JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Janet, and I hope you are doing well. The citations were removed because they were personal blogs. Per BLOGS, "Anyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert. That is why self-published material such as books, personal websites or personal blogs are largely not acceptable as sources". As I understand, the person who wrote the blog is related to the subject of the blog (correct me if I am wrong). So, unless the book "Robley and Mildred" that those citations were based off, was published by an independent publishing house, it is likely a self-published book. Hence, it will not be considered a reliable source. You will need to find sources that would be considered reliable — that is published by reputable newspapers or independent books (essentially by sources that are not linked to the person in question). — The Most Comfortable Chair 12:15, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear The Most Comfortable Chair I hope you are well. Thank you for your previous email explaining what had gone wrong with the citations on the Irene Mawer page.

I think I have now sorted the issues, and wondered if you would be kind enough to give me your opinion in advance of me updating the page?

There were two problematic citations:

1. proving Mildred’s birth name. I can now prove this using her birth certificate, either via a direct link to the photograph of the certificate which is on the problematic blog. Or, the second option is that I can add a screenshot of the birth certificate to the Wiki page. Would either (or both) of these options be acceptable? (It is not possible to add a link to the original certificate itself as this would entail the viewer paying a fee.) 2. The second problem was proving where a quote was taken from. I now have the link: https://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/bff8ef654ef045c39fc9b0d244c27fe4

I fully understand the situation with self-published blogs, however, this does raise a conundrum. The blog that I used is in fact not a blog, but a fully-researched book, published in this manner as this suited the author, Jack Tannett.

The book is entitled ‘Robley and Mildred’ and tells the story of his great-uncle, Surgeon-Captain Robley H. J. Brown, RN, and and his wife Mildred Robley-Browne (nee Peters).

Jack does not wish to make any profit from the book, hence the self-publishing route. (The book is free to access, for everyone.)

The book is thoroughly researched and all the proof of his work is contained within the book - it just isn’t cited in the same way as a Wiki page (the book tells a true story, rather than provides a list of facts). His published archive of illustrations and independently verifiable information consists of 1,127 files, with an overall size of 848 MB for the archive alone.

Much of the book uses personal diaries and photograph albums of Robley Brown, these contain newspaper cuttings and programs of events. Much of the information has been supplied to, and then published by, the Navy Records Society (NRS). The Society publishes rare and original documents on naval history. By typing ‘Robley Browne’ into the search box, it will be possible to see a list of articles submitted by Jack Tannett. There is an article about his life after his marriage to Mildred, however, the full article is not available unless the reader becomes a member of NRS (so this is not a suitable source for my citation, I think?) Here is the link https://www.navyrecords.org.uk/

I would be very glad if you would have a look at a separate blog post (actual blog post, not book) which Jack Tannett has written at my request and which I will be posting on my Irene Mawer website (not on the Wiki page). It describes in detail the connection between Irene Mawer and Mildred Robley-Browne (nee Peters): V2 Mildred Blog.docx https://www.dropbox.com/s/5af2s584l74bezy/V2%20Mildred%20Blog.docx?dl=0 In the blog post there is an obituary for Mildred Robley-Browne (nee Peters) which was published in the Times Newspaper (20 January 1973) as well as other interesting evidence. All of this information and evidence is taken from the privately published book ‘Robley and Mildred’ and has been condensed to suit my purposes for my own web site.

Through the self-published book, I can provide access to the marriage certificate of Browne and Peters (or I could post a screenshot of it on to the Irene Mawer Wiki page).

I would be very grateful for your thoughts and comments on the suitability of quoting from the unpublished book, now that I have (hopefully) shown it to be a reliable and credible source. However, I don’t think I will actually need to cite it because I can add a screenshot of the birth certificate to the Irene Mawer Wiki page (if this is allowed), and I have found an independent link to the other problematic citation.

I hope that this communication with you is in order. I am cautious as I am aware it is a very long message and I hope it is not ‘unwieldy’ or difficult to follow. If it is unclear, then I will be very happy to clarify any points.

Thank you very much for your help in this matter and I hope that you are able to get back to me in due course. Best wishes, Janet. JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you are formatting perfectly and I am able to follow your texts without any difficulties :) Now, there is one issue with birth certificates, and that is: "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", per PRIMARYCARE.

However, I believe I do have a solution to this issue. We will not be able to directly use Jack Tannett's comprehensively researched book, however well intentioned. But, we can make use of references Jack used himself. For instance, page 4 and 5 cite Mildred's birth name "Peters" from newspaper clippings (not sure about page 5). As long as we know details of those newspapers, you can use {{Cite news}} to cite those news mentions, and that is good enough to verify "(nee Peters)". Wikipedia citations don't always need links or URLs (it sure is preferred but not required). You can do this with other things that Jack has written about, since Jack has been thorough enough to have snippets of actual reliable sources. As long as we know details of reliable sources that Jack used to back the specific things he has written, we can use those aforementioned reliable sources to cite facts in the article.

Let me know if you are not able to follow what I said because it might seem confusing. I will gladly clarify and answer any questions you have, and I will be able to do so quickly as work is going to be pretty relaxed for the next 3 months. — The Most Comfortable Chair 01:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I do understand the reasoning. I have contacted Jack to see if he has the name and date of the newspapers that the relevant clippings have been taken from. If not, I will see if I can find them in the British Newspaper Archive. I am sure I will find them.

Next question: I followed your link ref Cite news. Wow! That is complicated. I don’t know which one to choose. Either the second one or the third one, I would guess. That is, either one with no credited author, or one that is archived. How do I know if it is archived? I am guessing that the article I will use will be classed as archived because it is so old. What would you suggest, please? Thanks.

JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "archive" parameter is to provide a link to online archives such as Wayback Machine, so if you can find the clippings in some online database like British Newspaper Archive, we can make use of that — let me know if you find it and I will help you out with that. When picking parameters, in citation templates, we don't have to fill in every detail — just as many as we can.

I will illustrate how to do this with a hypothetical, and using Shropshire Star as an example. Here is what citing the newspaper clipping seen on page 4 would look like, if it was from Shropshire Star (which is headquartered in Ketley, Telford) and published on 25 December 1919:

The template with filled parameters — <ref>{{cite news |date= 25 December 1919 |title='King of the Happy Wood.' Produced by Miss Peter's Pupils |newspaper=Shropshire Star |location=Ketley, Telford}}</ref>
This will appear in the article as — "'King of the Happy Wood.' Produced by Miss Peter's Pupils". Shropshire Star. Ketley, Telford. 25 December 1919.

Similarly, you can do this with several other newspaper clippings as well. If Jack can provide you with the references he has used, I imagine that you will be able to add a lot more things to the article. — The Most Comfortable Chair 14:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Well, here goes, fingers crossed: please could you have a look at this link and see if it is suitable for proving that Mildred Peters married and changed her name to Mildred Robley-Browne and that she is the same woman who taught Greek Dance in New Zealand. Oh I do hope this is suitable, I feel like Alice down the rabbit hole! https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19221206.2.8 It is now my bedtime and my brain has gone to sleep so I can’t wrestle with the ‘how to’ until tomorrow, so any help that you might be able to give me would be gratefully accepted. Thanks. JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 20:01, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to say, the relevant paragraph is number 13 (including the very top section). It starts “A marriage will take place in March,...” JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is exactly the kind of reference I was talking about — I went ahead and added the citation with additional parameters, as mentioned in the link. Editing Wikipedia can be curiouser and curiouser indeed! — The Most Comfortable Chair 01:47, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yowee! Thank you so much. What a relief lol. I am grinning like the Cheshire Cat! JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 11:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, JanetFizzCurtis

Thank you for creating Irene Mawer.

User:Scope creep, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Great article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Scope creep}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creep^Talk 11:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Scopecreep: Thank you very much for your kind comment JanetFizzCurtis (talk) 17:34, 28 June 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) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]