User talk:Moneysuch8
January 2012
[edit]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Howard Eliott Payne. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 02:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Re: Howard Eliott Payne
[edit]Regarding Payne's birth date, had you properly explained your previous changethat would have cleared up some misunderstandings. You replaced a reference from Sydsvenskan, a daily paper which can be considered a reliable source, with a geneaology index which could also be considered reliable, but difficult to verify because the details require a subscription i.e. are pay-walled. I'll leave the DOB alone for now, but further references should be found to support this. Also in future editing, please remember that not everyone can see the details from findmypast.co.uk. Dl2000 (talk) 16:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Sourcing
[edit]Please don't replace reliable sources with less reliable ones which not everybody can see. Thanks. --John (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have replaced a dodgy reference (foreign music website that likely used Wikipedia for details) with a birth record, that is readable by all. If you click the reference it shows you the birth details. Moneysuch8 (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- As others have pointed out, this resource is not accessible unless you pay. Also, if you must add these links, they should supplement, not replace an existing source. Does that make sense? --John (talk) 17:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, that doesn't make sense purely because it isn't true! You don't have to pay to view the page, as you will see if you click on it! findmypast references are more usless and reliable and useful than books people do actually have to pay to read and aren't available online or websites with questionable information. Moneysuch8 (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- I am not sure what you mean. Books are available in libraries without payment, but the site you are linking to is behind a paywall, so I would have to pay to use it. Are you affiliated with the site in some way? Please reply here rather than at my talk. --John (talk) 18:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- LOL. It isn't behind a paywall - what are you talking about?! I'm not registered on their site and got the information, if you click on the reference it shows you the record?!?! If you think an online resource of BIRTH RECORDS isn't a far better reference than a book that isn't available online, then whatever.Moneysuch8 (talk) 18:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- Indeed. I have raised this at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard so we can see what others think. --John (talk) 19:21, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- LOL. It isn't behind a paywall - what are you talking about?! I'm not registered on their site and got the information, if you click on the reference it shows you the record?!?! If you think an online resource of BIRTH RECORDS isn't a far better reference than a book that isn't available online, then whatever.Moneysuch8 (talk) 18:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- I am not sure what you mean. Books are available in libraries without payment, but the site you are linking to is behind a paywall, so I would have to pay to use it. Are you affiliated with the site in some way? Please reply here rather than at my talk. --John (talk) 18:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, that doesn't make sense purely because it isn't true! You don't have to pay to view the page, as you will see if you click on it! findmypast references are more usless and reliable and useful than books people do actually have to pay to read and aren't available online or websites with questionable information. Moneysuch8 (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- As others have pointed out, this resource is not accessible unless you pay. Also, if you must add these links, they should supplement, not replace an existing source. Does that make sense? --John (talk) 17:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- Pending a central consensus that the source you are adding is a reliable one, please stop adding it. If you continue it will become a user conduct issue. Please don't. --John (talk) 22:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, let's not use birth records THAT EVERYONE CAN SEE - let's use some a random website as a source instead. Let's not use official documents that record everyones birth details, nah. Moneysuch8 (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- (cross-posted to WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard)I'm going to step in here (as an uninvolved admin) and put down my foot. Findmypast.co.uk is behind a paywall; they require registration and payment for every single record they find which matches the searcher's criteria. I can assume good faith up to a point, but the combative attitude exhibited by Moneysuch8 exhausts it. There is more than a whiff of promotion going on here, and it's going to stop until there is a consensus that it is an acceptable source. Moneysuch8, if you add another link to findmypast.co.uk before there is a consensus that it meets our sourcing guidelines, you will find yourself blocked. Horologium (talk) 02:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
[edit]Hi. When you recently edited John Perry (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)