User talk:Tranmere Robur

Treasure Island

More than one editor has now reverted the addition of a self-published hypothesis that locations in Treasure Island were based on a specific locality. The academic consensus is not that this is correct, and so far the consensus on WP is that this isn't correct. Please wait until there's some academic consensus on this point. If it's correct, it won't take long for there to be agreement that this was where Stevenson was referring to. --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 02:31, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The only way you can prove a local link is to get local agreement and that is what I have done.

I have spent two hours sitting in the office of a Birkenhead M.P. who also has knowledge of the area, he would not want to risk ridicule in the local press (also cited) if he were not 100% certain.

I have spent three hours in the offices of Wirral Council who also have knowledge of the area and they have signed in agreement. Tranmere Robur (talk) 02:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia doesn't allow original research like this. Wikipedia looks for references in reliable, published sources. I strongly urge you to write up your research and get it published in a scholarly journal. (Seriously, I recommend it! There's nothing like seeing your name on a scholarly article to make you smile.) Once your information is available in reliable, published sources it can be put into WP. --Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 02:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, the postings were a learning curve for me. I have got so much of my information from Wikipedia in the last four years and have happily included it in my research as I was confident in its provenance. Thanks for taking your time with me on this. best John Lamb. Tranmere Robur (talk) 10:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Hello, I'm Fieryninja. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Jules Verne, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Fieryninja (talk) 07:11, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, I will prepare a more detailed contextual submission around Verne's literary association with Birkenhead. Tranmere Robur (talk) 07:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, CSS Alabama, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Donald Albury 19:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Donald,

The article talks about 'claimed' similarities between the CSS Alabama and Captain Nemo's Nautilus. The first citation is William Butcher, the world's leading authority on the author Jules Verne and the second citation is from Jules Verne himself. All the further similarities are then exact page referenced to the memoirs of Raphael Semmes (the Captain of the CSS Alabama) on Project Gutenberg and then paired referenced to Jules Verne's novel 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. Can you please tell me how these are not reliable sources? best Tranmere Robur (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which sounds like original research, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. We must wait for reliable sources to make those connections, and then we can cite the reliable sources. - Donald Albury 21:32, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to James Cropper (abolitionist) has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 12:08, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Hi Tranmere Robur! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Jules Verne that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this advice, I will take this on board. Tranmere Robur (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Tranmere Robur! Your additions to James Cropper (abolitionist) have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 23:26, 24 October 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) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jules Verne

Your edits to various articles appear to be original research, which is not allowed. The fact that the claims have been mentioned in one local newspaper, and by one MP, does not really change that - and most certainly does not justify the extensive additions that you are trying to make to various articles. They will be removed. The most that can be retained is, perhaps, one sentence referring to the claims in one article - not by carpet-bombing a whole tranche of articles. So, I'll revert your edits, and I suggest that you should then make your case for reinstating them on an article talk page, so that other editors can comment. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ghymyrtle,

The additions placed in the Birkenhead, Wallasey, Tranmere, Birkenhead Park and Blue Coat wikipedia pages relate to relatively new claims on the 'Jules Verne and the Heroes of Birkenhead' website which only became 'live' a year or so ago. Yes they refer to original research, but the additions to the wikipedia that pages you mention in themselves are not new research in themselves, they are simply referring to new claimed links made on a website and repeated by the local newspaper and supported by the town's M.P. The edits are not original research but references to original research.

If a new book comes out, with 'claims' say about the hypothesised site of an ancient battle, are we not allowed to record these claimed sites on Wikipedia?

The claimed links have been covered in the Liverpool Echo, but they are not being represented as proven facts, the key word here is 'claimed links'. The support of the town's M.P. (with extensive local knowledge) I would argue does change that significantly, and I would respectfully state that an extra four lines on the Birkenhead, Wallasey, Tranmere, Birkenhead Park wikipedia pages are not 'extensive additions' considering the world famous nature of the books involved and the potential cultural importance to the relatively small local places of Birkenhead, Tranmere and Wallasey.

They are 'claimed links' and such there are many examples of 'claimed links' on wikipedia that also cite newspaper articles.

Please rest assured I am not trying to 'carpet bomb' anything, it is just that the same claimed links equally affect the cultural background of Birkenhead, Wallasey and Tranmere.

thankyou Robur the Conqueror Tranmere Robur (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The basic issue here is that you are trying to use Wikipedia to publicise your own research - which, as I understand it, has not been confirmed or even discussed by any academic or other reputable sources. You stated, further up this page, that in real life you are John Lamb, who has undertaken this research. So, there is a conflict of interest in your seeking to edit the articles. Your own website is not a reliable source for your own claims - it is self-published, not independent. I think we can probably refer, briefly, to the Echo report - something along the lines of "Local historian John Lamb has claimed that both Jules Verne and Robert Louis Stevenson based some of the geography of their novels on features in the Wirral" - and that would probably best be done at Wirral Peninsula#Wirral in literature. Essentially, you are trying to use Wikipedia to publicise your own work - and Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Personally, I think it's interesting - but that doesn't matter (and I hope you agree that TRFC need a new striker!). Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ghymyrtle,

Thanks for your prompt reply. I have done as you advised and edited the claims on to the Wirral Peninsula, Wirral in literature section. If academic discussion increases and reputable sources subsequently back up the claims regarding Jules Verne, Robert Louis Stevenson and Wirral, then I hope this will go towards fulfilling the criteria you have stated....and I do agree with what you say about TRFC. Yours Tranmere Robur Tranmere Robur (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please view Raphael Semmes wikipedia page which has been nurtured and improved by wikipedia for six months and protected regarding the far less contentious submissions re Wirral and Mysterious Island and Treasure Island than you have removed. All the related submissions you have removed, have not only been sanctioned by Wikipedia re Semmes but improved on the Semmes wikipedia page, by people other than me.

Everything you have recently removed has been happily existing as a small part of the the Raphael Semmes wikipedia page for the last six months, so please be consistent by either

a) removing all the Jules Verne / Mysterious Island links on the Raphael Semmes wikipedia page.

or

reinstating exactly the same information that existed on several wikipedia pages until a few days ago.

best Robur Tranmere Robur (talk) 03:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That Semmes material needs to be cut way down. It overwhelms the article. Please study WP:NOR. 108.31.0.164 (talk) 05:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]