User talk:76.116.5.27

July 2007

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Rambutan (talk) 11:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice --76.116.5.27 13:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Robert de Holland, 1st Baron Holand has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 14:50, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I have readded the change, but put an edit comment, and added more detail in the discussion page. 76.116.5.27 (talk) 15:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Talk:Robert de Holland, 1st Baron Holand constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 15:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?? How so? I added a factual addition to wikipedia, and added the change comment as you yourself suggested 76.116.5.27 (talk) 15:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I've withdrawn my warnings.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 15:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Robert de Holland

No personal slight was intended! "Vandalism" an umbrella term used to describe a range of unconstructive edits. (Yes, I have read the definition, I agree with you, and have asked the owner of the tool I'm using to change the messages. Often, an edit really is vandalism, in your case it was not.)

Vis-a-vis your edit: As I mentioned on the Discussion page, it's not fruitful to mention the notable descendents of someone who lived in 1300. That's roughly 35 generations ago. In that time, he Robert de Holland, 1st Baron Holand could have 1,000,000s of descendents (I just did the math). So practically, it's not a situation Wikipedia wants to be in: potentially having a huge list of links. See WP:LINKFARM on this. That in itself is completely sufficient to remove Obama from the article. Not to gild the lily, then, geneology linking back to famous people is notoriously inaccurate, and such a claim would need to be sourced.

Finally, I agree that to be consistent, these sentences should be removed entirely, and for the same reasons: "He is also noted in genealogy sites for being the earliest notable ancestor of several disparate world leaders. He is reportedly ancestral to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, the Harrison family, Louis XVI, Barack Obama, Winston Churchill, and others." Piano non troppo (talk) 04:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

OK I agree on the content issue. Sorry, the "vandalism" charge is offputting to newer editors and therefore is a sensitive topic to me. Since the definition of vandalism is very narrow, and there is a template message for non-constructive edits. 76.116.5.27 (talk) 12:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)