User talk:Mac Edmunds

This is Mac Edmunds's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

A shared interest

Hi, by a very roundabout route, I find you are working on a draft of an article I’ve planned to write for some time, that of John, last Lord Tredegar. You’ve done an excellent job of pulling such sources as there are together. Would you be interested in collaborating on it? There’s some work to be done but I’m reasonably confident it could be got over the AfC line. Let me know. KJP1 (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @KJP1

Good to find someone similarly interested in John's life, and thank you for your compliments on my draft. Yes - that does sound interesting. What are you thinking of contributing?

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 10:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've done the hard work of gathering the sources. What I think it needs is a copy-edit, as there are a few things that don't currently meet Wikipedia requirements. Examples include:

Use of the first name - He should be Morgan, not John, e.g. " John sells Ruppera";
Personal opinions - we tend not to use these, e.g. "This clever decision", "Sadly, it was to no avail";
Quotes - this shouldn't be italicised, e.g. "the sale was good for his bank balance, and his soul";
Capitalisation - there's a fair few words that shouldn't be capitalised, e.g. "Peer, Landowner, House, Golf"
Conversions - we have a template for these, e.g. "for £40,000 or £1,200,000 in today's money";
Sources - we can't use Youtube as a source, and I'm not sure it's adding much. Many of the others, e.g. the British Newspaper Archive ones, are paywalled, and this should be indicated. We should have page numbers for book sources, as well as the book details, ISBN etc, for this like Paul Busby.
Further reading - those that are used as Sources shouldn't be here;
Paragraphs - there are quite a few one-sentence para.s that should be combined. There's also a part where the chronology flips, Evan's mentioned twice.
Wording - there are a few oddities, e.g. "Retirement". From what, as he appears never to have worked?

If you like, I could have a go, and you could see what you think. If you don't like it, reversion is easy. KJP1 (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @KJP1

Wow - That is all really useful! As you suggest, I think it would be more convenient for the both of us if you corrected my errors, to avoid constant messaging back-and-forth.

With regards to the Paul Busby book citation, that can be replaced with the YouTube podcast citation (also by Paul Busby), for ease.

Although I agree with all of your other suggestions, I am keen to keep the YouTube citation. Although it is social media, and therefore arguably less reliable, it is a podcast on the history of the Morgans and Tredegar, by Paul Busby and Goff Morgan - both notable historians. Furthermore, all information in the podcast would have been thoroughly, and based off of Newspaper articles and other reliable sources.

Perhaps, if it has to be removed, it could be added to the "further reading" section, as it does include a lot of information regarding John's life.

What do you think?

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 13:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a day, and you can see what you think. The trouble with YouTube is that it’s not really a WP:Reliable source, but let’s see. KJP1 (talk) 17:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.s. Are Paul Busby and Goff Morgan academic historians? I like their podcasts, although they are a little too long for my taste!, but had understood they were more local enthusiasts than professional historians. KJP1 (talk) 17:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am unsure. Both proclaim to be "historians" in all of their profiles, but no mention of whether academic. I look forward to see the results of your work!

By the way, I am located in Wales, U.K, for a reference of what times I am likely to reply.

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably best if we now move this discussion to the Draft article Talkpage. I've copied all this over for ease. And you can see my first run at a re-draft. I hope you like it. KJP1 (talk) 07:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar has been accepted

John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's good to see. Many congrats. KJP1 (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing! @KJP1, thank you for your help in getting the article to a submittable standard - it looks great.

Mac Edmunds (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ca, Thank you for reviewing the article - much appreciated.

Mac Edmunds (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sir John Michael Dillwyn-Venables-Llewelyn, 4th Baronet

The article Sir John Michael Dillwyn-Venables-Llewelyn, 4th Baronet has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks notability, no reliable independent sources about him with more than genealogical info or passing mentions.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 15:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Fram

I apologise that the article was uploaded with such little citation. When I pressed publish, I didn't realise that the draft would become public, as this has not happened with my previous articles & drafts.

Since you proposed deletion of the article, I have added significant citations and references from reliable sources to prove Llewelyn's notability, including articles that are specific to him, and highlight the significance of his career in the vintage racing community. I will continue to edit the article to add detail and further information.

In the meantime, I hope that the current citations will suffice to save the article from deletion.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]