User talk:LondonScottish

Nicholas Lane

Thank you for your recent substantive, informative and interesting expansion of the Nicholas Lane article. :-) I'd like to separate the more explanatory "references" into a separate "Notes" sub-section which should then allow the embedded references to then be included with the other references. I'll convert your refs to use more citation templates for consistency too. -- KenBailey (talk) 07:38, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, if you think that's the thing to do. It sounds like quite a fiddly process! -- LondonScottish (talk) 11:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've done this now, not too fiddly, just a bit laborious. Hopefully you will agree this is clearer for the reader. Please check I've not massacred your work too much in the process!!

The main change is that I have used the refn template to separate out the narrative notes from the supporting source references as you will see - and then replaced your inline citations with individual footnote references for the sources.

I have also added many citation templates as these help ensure consistency and act as a guide to improve quality. In particular, I have used the cite archive template quite extensively, and you will see from the template documentation that not only does it require the institution name but also the collection. I have added a collection name for the TNA references but there are several missing for the others. As a workaround, I have (hopefully temporarily) inserted a generic placeholder phrase: "(Archive collections)" which needs replacing with something more accurate and specific in each case. In particular, I have not been able to validate the Kingston History Centre references, even though I believe the KHC uses the TNA Discovery database for its catalogue. Anything you can do to help expand these would be good.

I have used the sfnp template to accommodate your Harvard citation for the "Gunasena" sources (sfnp adds parentheses around the reference year to preserve your style) and moved the source citation for these to a separate Bibliography to accommodate this. The advantage of this is that it then permits specific page references to be used within the reference list but then link onwards to the related single source in the Bibliography. There are a couple of Gunasena references that lack page numbers if you have access to them still.

Finally, you will also notice in the source that I have inserted a number of html comment tags to annotate where further information or action is required. These comments should be removed once acted upon.

Anyway, see what you think.... -- KenBailey (talk) 06:22, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This looks good. It certainly must have been laborious. Well done.

The only thing that appears amiss to me, on first pass, is in reference 27, where the text now concludes "number=31}}".

With regard to the citations where you have suggested that more detail is needed: I am afraid I don't currently have the time and resources to address this issue. It will be done when circumstances permit. -- LondonScottish (talk) 07:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll do a few more tidies myself. Mind you, if you don't do those citations you do realise your pay will be reduced accordingly? ;-) --KenBailey (talk) 17:25, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference details

Hi again. I have traced and expanded the majority of the Nicholas Lane references as you can see at this version, many with relevant web links, including the Kingston History Centre ones that had me stumped earlier. There are several that I have not been able to locate however, so, if and when you have access to your source details, it would be great if you can clarify and expand further before I start pestering poor overworked and under-valued archivists for the related collections.

I presume the MS Acc1478 in citation 2 is the same source as MS Acc1478 in citation 49. If so, then these two can be conflated to a single named reference. Either way though, I've had no success searching for it in neither TNA Discovery nor the SHC online catalogues.
Two Gunasena (1982) and Gunasena (2007) citations would benefit from page references.
The British Library refs for the map of Beckenham and map of part of the Manor of Cryalls remain elusive too.
The Merton College Library reference 54 has no detail - an item name, collection and accession number would be ideal.
I haven't given up searching Northamptonshire Record Office catalogue for the copy map of Greatworth, but more clues could help.
The Wandsworth Museum ref 60 is probably a hopeless case, given the Museum's current status, but more detail would be helpful if possible.

Overall though, its gone pretty well I think. Thanks again for adding all these pointers. --KenBailey (talk) 11:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The way you encode the references is more sophisticated than I'm used to, so it may be easier for me to explain matters than to try and finesse the notes myself. To respond to your questions etc., in order:

The citation should read “Gunasena (1982), p. 1, citing Cobham Churchwarden’s Book, Guildford Muniment Room (1599-1607 unrecorded)." The citation at 49 should be expanded to “MS Acc. 1478 pt. 1588” and is perhaps best prefaced by “Gunasena (1982), p. 1, citing Surrey Record Office”. The MS identified does not show up on the Surrey History Centre catalogue so I think one needs to retain the SRO reference.
I have now provided the relevant page references.
The documents referenced should be “Cartographic Items Maps 188.k.3.(4.)” and “Cartographic Items Maps M.T.6.b.2.(7.)”.
No greater detail is available than appears on page 105 of the Bendall article.
This is presumably the Greatworth Enclosure Map mentioned at p. 31 of Northamptonshire Past and Present, 2004 (No. 57 of the Northamptonshire Record Society’s publications), which is there given the NRO reference XYZ991, but the Record Office catalogue does not recognise such reference. You can find the item in Northamptonshire Past and Present by Googling "p i king greatworth enclosure". It's the PDF.
The basis for showing Wandsworth Museum as the home for the map is Gunasena (2007), p. 4. In Dorian Gerhold’s 1994 booklet “Putney in 1636”, the map is stated to be the property of St Mary’s Church, Putney. Presumably it was on loan to Wandsworth Museum at the time of closure, and one therefore cannot assume it was automatically transferred to Battersea Arts Centre.

--LondonScottish (talk) 17:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarifications. That's great. I will follow up on these over the coming days.

It took me some time to grasp the use of templates myself, mostly learned by adapting other editors' template use in articles I have contributed to. It is initially more complicated than free-form citations (which are, of course, better than unsourced statements) but it is worth the effort. They bring consistency, push one to search for additional detail, facilitate formatting (such as in the person infobox) and facilitate automated maintenance and reporting processes. As I learned I went back over some of my earlier work and incorporated templates to further improve the articles. Be bold!, as they say!

The implication of your comments above is that some of the references in the Lane article are actually primary sources cited by secondary source authors. Our next challenge in this case is to follow the guidance and simply "say where you read it" to clarify where the article information actually came from. In effect we will end up validating, and even updating, the secondary source author's work!

Overall, this further cleanup will really help improve the article's progress up the quality scale. --KenBailey (talk) 07:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 50 should read "Gunasena (1982), pp. 1, 7, citing Surrey Record Office MS Acc, 1478 pt. 1588, George Evellin leases Oxdownes to Thomas Cateringham." Would it be possible for you to adjust it accordingly? -- LondonScottish (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hope that looks correct now. Thanks for removing the other "MS Acc 1478" - I see now how that slipped in there. It would still be good to find where the MS is now and similarly the Cobham Churchwardens Book. A copy of the latter is, I think, referred to in a list of holdings at Cranleigh Local and Family History Centre resources. I'll try to tidy up the Wandsworth Museum reference next though. -- KenBailey (talk) 05:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, LondonScottish. Thank you for creating Alexander Christie (portrait painter). User:Netherzone, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for creating this article on a Scottish artist.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Netherzone}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Netherzone (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, LondonScottish. Thank you for your work on Arthur Burrell. User:Lightburst, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Lightburst}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Lightburst (talk) 14:51, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]