User talk:Olga Sydney

Welcome!

Hello, Olga Sydney, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Meta Townsend, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! BethNaught (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is OK to delete it. I did not locate much information on that person. It is understandable though due to this particular time. Regards, Olga Sydney (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Meta Townsend

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Meta Townsend requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. BethNaught (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Christina Stead

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Christina Stead, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

You may want to take some time and learn about referencing on Wikipedia. Here are some places to start:

If you need further help, you can ask at the WP:Teahouse 76.14.122.5 (talk) 22:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lydham Hall

You are invited to help clean up Lydham Hall. See Talk:Lydham Hall § References for any discussion. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate greatly your help. It was unfortunate timing for me. Straggling to get starting my new equipment and experiencing difficulties as I am non-native English speaker. Was thinking of coming back to it and probably will but not for a couple of month. By the way I have written two large works on Lydham Hall, one is Bricks and Mortar and another is titled Beyond the Bricks and Mortar. They have different ISBNs and the first one was a printed Jubilee edition. Kind REgards, Olga Sydney (talk) 17:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presumed edit-conflict at Lydham Hall

This edit appears to undo many valid changes for no stated reason, so I have reverted it. Please re-apply your changes to the current version of the article. Also please read Help:Edit conflict, in particular Help:Edit conflict#Reverting and its advice to "check the diff". If you actually intended to revert my edits, please raise a discussion on the article talk page about it. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained the removal of Governor's name. The grant was promised by Bribane but only 10 years later was finalised. There is no conflict here, just knowledge or original document. I also offered you in our previous communication a list of my concerns. Olga Sydney (talk) 09:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained the removal of Governor's name. — Yes, but you have not explained all the other changes that you made in the same edit. Click here to see your edit. Mitch Ames (talk) 01:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Museum contains of the PUBLIC donations. The SGHS Inc is a custodian of the collection unless they will change the Society's Constitution. The Council does not own it. The end of story.

Regards, O Olga Sydney (talk) 07:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mitch. No, it was not my reference to Wiki. Thank you for reading my and Janette's original works and making changes. A few pointers. 1. Next to Christina Stead name you provided link to David Stead, her father. Need change. 2. Ellen Davis rented house Kensington house and died there. That needs to be changed. 3. TMHLC is based on her personal recollections. Exactly. 4. There would not be any citation re furniture from National Trust as it is a hard copy document not available online. 5. The same goes to the 'only' museum within the area. 6. It is better not to provide link to Heritage NSW as it contains incorrect information and I could not push it even if I am trying very hard. Bureaucracy is in place.

Look, I am asking you kindly to make these changes as I am acquainted with the LH curator who behaves like a high school bully towards me as a result of changing the content. I am tired of that person's ignorance. Thank you very much for looking after this page. You did help a lot so I could finish another work that possibly will make LHC unhappy again.

Appreciate your help. Kind Regards and Great Appreciation, Olga Olga Sydney (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4. There would not be any citation re furniture from National Trust as it is a hard copy document not available online. 5. The same goes to the 'only' museum within the area. — References do not need to be online. See Wikipedia: Reliable sources § Definition of published and Wikipedia: Citing sources § Indicating availability. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Olga Sydney (talk) 09:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

citations required

Regarding your edit [1] and my subsequent edits [2][3][4] ...

Please do not just delete citation requests {{cn}} - instead provide the citation (in the article, not in the edit summary or a talk page).

Please do not just delete {{failed verification}} tags. Either provide an appropriate citation, or (if appropriate) a page number or quotation from the current reference so that it may be verified. The page number or quotation from a long source is helpful, especially when there is no obvious text to search for. I'm happy to admit I'm wrong if the supplied reference actually does support the statement, but help me out here by telling me exactly where in the reference to find it.

Mitch Ames (talk) 07:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no citation to the LEP as it is not available online. The hard copy has a list of over 100 items.

It was THEN Rockdale Municipal Council, now Bayside, NSW.

It is still the FIRST and the ONLY museum within the former Rockdale Council as it simply is.

Page 39:" Permanent Conservation Order No 477 in pursuance of section 44 of the Heritage Act

1977, I, the Minister of Planning and Environment, do... and declare that this permanent conservation order apply to the curtilage ... (H.C. 33396) Signed by Bob Carr, 20th August, 1986"

The Heritage NSW has incorrect information therefore, think of the audience, dont confuse the readers.

Is there anything else you would like clarification with? It is a Wikipedia!

Regards, O Olga Sydney (talk) 07:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no citation to the LEP as it is not available online. — As I mentioned previously, references do not need to be online. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources § Definition of published and Wikipedia:Citing sources § Indicating availability. You could use {{Cite document}} or {{Cite book}} or any of several other templates (listed on those templates' documentation pages) that do not require URLs - it doesn't have to be {{cite web}}. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... provide an appropriate citation, or .. a page number or quotation ... help me out here by telling me exactly where in the reference to find it. — Of course when I say "me" I mean "the reader in general", ie add the citation, page number, quotation etc to the article, in the relevant place (not just as a comment to me on a talk page, with no direct context) so that all the readers can see and (if they can access the source) verify it. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit [with multiple unrelated changes] ... — In future, please consider making one change (or several small, directly related changes) per edit, (eg [5][6][7]), rather than multiple unrelated changes in a single edit (eg [8]). This will make it much easier for us to link to each specific small edit and/or discuss each specific individual issue ({{cn}}, {{failed verification}} etc) or instance thereof in a separate talk page section (preferably on the article talk page, where it belongs) or thread so that we can more easily resolve each issue independently. The current methodology of dumping multiple unrelated comments into a single post (eg [9][10][11]) with no links to the related edits (to tell me what you are talking about) is not helping us. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not require so much o citation. It is not an academic article. The sources are listed properly in all original articles. You want me to proof every single word here. I wonder why.

Leave this article alone. Stop following it and requesting more and more sources. It is getting ridiculous. Olga Sydney (talk) 14:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See:

Please discuss the individual items separately in the relevant section. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All replied. Who are 'we' in your message. Why do I have to make it easier for 'you'? As I mentioned. All my corrections are based on original source. Why you are doubting every single word and treating this article as an academic assessor? That is not your place. You may well be a dedicated volunteer but you are not to question an academically trained independent scholar who spent years on the subject. it is simply disrespectful and gets to far. Leave this article alone. I will learn editing soon. Please stop wasting my TIME!!! Olga Sydney (talk) 05:50, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are 'we' in your message. — Mitch Ames and Olga Sydney, who are having an ongoing (since May 2024) disagreement about the Lydham Hall contents and/or citations.

Why do I have to make it easier for 'you'? — You don't "have to make it easier for [me]", but we clearly disagree on some aspects of the article, and per WP:DISPUTE "Editors are expected to engage in good faith to resolve their disputes". There are multiple (sometimes unrelated) points of disagreement, so making small edits would be one way to break the task down into manageable chunks. Per WP:TALKSUBHEADING, using separate subsection headings to discuss multiple changes would help resolve the issues faster.

All my corrections are based on original source. — Then cite those sources directly (subject to WP:PRIMARY, which I suggest you read first). Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability § Responsibility for providing citations.

you are not to question an academically trained independent scholar who spent years on the subject — I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Expert editors. It's an essay, not a policy, but it mentions and links to certain aspects of policy that are relevant here.

Mitch Ames (talk) 10:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask where you so concerned about this article when it appeared initially as a blunt copy from the Heritage NSW? You trusted it and never questioned any single source. Now two academic studies seem to be not enough. You have 17 years on Wikipedia. I doubt you requested so many original sources. If I mentioned National Trust Australia (NSW division), it means that they did have original documents proving the loan. Why NSW must be removed? It is not Victoria's division. My presumption you saw one surname that you dont trust and therefore you want to have all original sources at your finger tips. They are all mentioned in my works and I do not want wish any longer to mention them, and it is not required by Wiki. The original article from Heritage NSW had no, I mean zero, original sources and you did not care about it. Please be fare to the readers. They dont require original sources especially these they could not view electronically. Olga Sydney (talk) 15:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask where you so concerned about this article when it appeared initially as a blunt copy from the Heritage NSW? ... — I was not aware of the article at all before May 2024. As an Australian, I watch Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board because sometimes things of interest to me appear there. In May, someone posted Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 62 § Lydham Hall, referring to a post on the NSW board asking if anyone had the time and patience to fix the referencing in the article. I did have the time and patience, and so I inserted the appropriate ref tags, up to that point purely as formatting exercise with no change to content or verification against references, per my comment on the article talk page. After that I started reading the article, realised it needed some work, so started copy-editing, checking references, fixing or flagging discrepancies where the article did not match the references that were cited (in the Wikipedia article), etc - see individual edit summaries for details.

If I mentioned National Trust Australia (NSW division), it means that they did have original documents proving the loan. Why NSW must be removed? — I have made many edits to the article, so it would be helpful if you linked to the specific edit so I knew exactly what you were referring to. In the absence of a specific indication, I assume that you mean this edit where I stated explicitly in the edit summary that "NSW" was not mentioned in the references cited. However I subsequently found a source that included NSW and restored NSW to the article with an appropriate citation.

... I do not want wish any longer to mention them, and it is not required by Wik. — I refer you to Wikipedia:Verifiability § Responsibility for providing citations, in particular the word "directly". Mitch Ames (talk) 13:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re "NSW," no sources in NSW include the state's name. It is not what I did. Wiki requires: "Using inline citations, provide reliable, published sources" which I did provide. You even added page numbers, which are not required by Wiki. There is no need to provide original sources for Wiki but you did requested these.

You should have common sense when requested the source 'the only museum within the area.' I researched and live within the area, therefore I made a reasonable statement.

Why would you call for other researchers than Sedneva? You did not like a surname?

I began composing editing this article in November 2021. Then decided to re-write it completely following a completion of research.

I think you have a good job but you went too far with it. Therefore, I am asking to edit something else.

I authored a few articles on Wiki but never had anybody so aggressively intervening like you. I would not want to be your student, I would of fail.

Wiki is not to overflow with historically correct information and in many cases, Wiki cannot be taken as a respectable truthful source. That is not the case for this particular article!

Regards, O Olga Sydney (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Discussion at WP:DRN#Lydham Hall, per moderator's request for DRN Rule A, in particular rule 7. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]
WP:DRN#Lydham Hall has been closed as abandoned. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have already explained - in detail, with links to specific edits and policies - reasons for my edits in previous posts, so I'm not going to repeat them here. However there are a couple of points worth noting that I have not already made elsewhere:

You even added page numbers, which are not required by Wiki — The are not required, but they are useful; see WP:PAGENUM, WP:CITEPAGE.
I researched and live within the area, therefore I made a reasonable statement — Please read WP:OR.
... decided to re-write it completely following a completion of research. ... I am asking to edit something else. — Please read WP:OWN.

Mitch Ames (talk) 05:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page numbers may well be useful, but not required. These interested will read the lot.

There is nobody who has counter a number of museums within the area, so trust Mr Common Sense please.

Yes, "I decided to re-write this article completely following a completion of my own research" replacing false information by a historically true content. This article is not a research. I could offer the citation to NSW Archival files that has no page number and citation is not possible unless you view the original document. Instead, cited studies contain mention of original sources and the true facts are explained and connected.

When re-writing this article, I provided the audience with the true information without too many details and made it to meet a different kind of audience, from a school child to academics, from these of non-native English language speakers to these who can speak/understand/write fluently. And it was all done in a good faith. Therefore, this kerfuffle about sources you started with page numbers is not needed. You are challenging here every point. May I ask why? Do you think the article has false information? Do you have grounds to object any part of the content? When you will be able to proof information wrong, please do offer your findings and share the sources.

With all do respect, I see no point to continue conversing with you on. My time is priceless. I am asking you to leave this article. I don't own it, but I have initiated it, authored it, personally researched the subject and continue to watch it.

As for ""furniture on loan from the National Trust" please refer to the Archival file in the National Trust Australia (NSW division), unpaginated folder, instead of SGHS Ins newsletter 35 years after the factual document was signed. Unfortunately, the SGHS could not even cite their own Constitution correctly, nor own bulletins. Olga Sydney (talk) 16:03, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look, you take too much of my time. You want everything now. I will read when I have time. You made me too busy when I could progress with other research. So I would prefer you stop harassing this article, stop unreasonable requests since you dont like the surname of the researcher, and I inform you that I complained about you. There are thousands of articles much poorer in content then this, so dont waste my time and deal with others. I will deal with this article as I see fit when I can spend more time. There is no deadline here. I am awaiting for another publication to come out therefore, more changes are coming. You may be an expert in editing but you have no common sense. I think you have learn about Lydham Hall more then its curator. Good day Olga Sydney (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mitch. I cooled down a bit and now able to let you know that all original documents are held in the State Archives (part of Museums of History NSW) and Bayside Council local history collection. Regards, Olga Sydney (talk) 08:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]