User talk:Martin of Sheffield
* November 2011 * June 2012 * August 2013 * October 2014 * January 2016 * September 2016 * July 2017 * June 2018 * March 2019
- 1 TUSC token 0d2143de092c67c18c2277c4667fe01e
- 2 Citation concepts?
- 3 Thank you!
- 4 A Day at the Races (film)
- 5 Thanks re: Can I use crappy networking equipment with 4K IP camera?
- 6 Referencing of the article on the Rev. Nathaniel Bartlett
- 7 Rev. Nathaniel Bartlett article
- 8 A word of thanks
- 9 A barnstar for you!
- 10 Precious anniversary
- 11 Jack (flag)
- 12 Teahouse problem
TUSC token 0d2143de092c67c18c2277c4667fe01e
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
Hi, Martin. I wondering if you might like to comment on some work I am doing at Draft:Basic citation concepts towards facilitating future citation discussions. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:19, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, I've had a quick glance and it looks good. We need a well thought out essay to clear up the ambiguities, so I'll start with a big pat on the back for you. At first glance though, I may have a number of points to make, but it is 23:30 here in the UK and I've just been enjoying a rather nice strong ale, so I'll wait until later to reply! I'd ask you to be patient though, I have another round of chemo-therapy tomorrow so may be somewhat under the weather for the next few days. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:33, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much for removing the inaccurate information on the aquagenic urticaria page, it is very much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Actually, A Day At The Races | 1937 was the title of the reference web page, but I should have left vertical bar out of it, it wasn't intended to be another parameter. Thanks for seeing my error, I substituted a "–" --rogerd (talk) 22:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- No problem, I was working on the list of pages with cite errors and trying to knock them into shape. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks re: Can I use crappy networking equipment with 4K IP camera?
Referencing of the article on the Rev. Nathaniel Bartlett
Hi Martin - The references look great. Your assistance in this respect is sincerely appreciated. There is, however, an error message attached to end note # 11 - to wit: "Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "FOOTNOTEGrumman1904121" defined multiple times with different content (see the help page). Please see 'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nathaniel_Bartlett'. Also, the link to the Revolutionary Soldiers of Redding, Connecticut... is 'https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysol00grum/page/n139', in case that might be helpful. More than one end note references the same page in Grumman, because - obviously - each page contains assorted info. Could you please resolve the error?
The following advice appears to define the problem and solution, but it's beyond me how to execute this mechanically:
"If you are going to reference the same source multiple times, Wikipedia allows you to name those sources so you can just refer to a source named "foo" rather than having to recreate all of the details about the citation (the author, the title, etc.) over and over. The name is created like this:
 Then, to invoke that footnote you have named foo, just type this:
 The content (the details of the citation) of the reference that has been named "foo" is thus defined only once but can be reused over and over."
Thanks again, and, Best regards - Gary Bartlett
- Fixed. I was aware of the errors, hence my final edit summary of "Two technical fixes yet to do, but it is midnight here. I will resume in the morning". The rest of the household was in bed with early starts, and I was keeping them awake! I'm on UK time.
- Please remember to sign all contributions to talk pages with four tildes thus: ~~~~ – it generates the signature and timestamp so that we know who we are talking to. Thanks. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 06:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Rev. Nathaniel Bartlett article
Sorry Martin - The text of the Roberts citation was not exactly correct, so I attempted to fix it. My correction took OK, but messed up the Russell citation. I'm not sure what I did wrong, but I would be grateful if you could fix it. I am appreciative of all your assistance assistance. I promise to do no more fiddling around with the final product. Thanks again, and Best regards - Gary Bartlett Connecticut Puritan (talk) 20:36, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- You'd introduced a space before the Russell citation so WP thought it was literal text such as code. Don't worry too much about fiddling" around. The article is in draft, not main space. If you don't fiddle you'll never learn. Do use the "Show Preview" button freely, it enables you to check what you've done without letting others see your mistakes! I use it all the time. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:43, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
A word of thanks
Martin - Despite the fascination that writing holds for me, I am at a loss for words to express my sincere appreciation for all the assistance you rendered in preparing my article for review. It’s probably the only article I’ll ever submit to Wikipedia, and now it has a good chance of being accepted. The supreme irony is that you as a Brit, assisted so admirably with an article about a rebel against the British Crown. Nevertheless, I am indeed grateful for all your effort.
- Ah, but he was British (1727–1776) longer than he was American (1776–1810)! :-) Seriously though, don't give up now. Your article is better than many on WP and an excellent first attempt. Your research is good, and now you know one way to cite sources in WP (there are other ways) you have all the makings of a valuable contributor. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
- Connecticut Puritan, in case you are still watching this page - I've left you a notice on your talk page. I'm afraid there's a lot of copyright violations in your draft at the moment, which will have to be sorted out before it can become an article. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 01:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Teamwork Barnstar|
|Thank for the input, Martin! THX1136 (talk) 13:45, 27 May 2019 (UTC)|
|Recorder (educational uses)|
|... you were recipient|
no. 1944 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!
I see that you have reinstated my comments in one of the sections. I thank you for it. When I went back a while after posting that comment, the whole thing looked all messed up. It looked like I had been a latecomer to a party of 20 people who'd been discussing for hours and I had inserted my random, non-constructive comment in the middle of someone else's comment, probably yours. I tried refreshing and purging but nothing worked. I realised that there were two threads by the same user on the same issue and it looked like sometimes my comment was flying up into a previous discussion, randomly in the middle of someone else's comment and sometimes it looked like it was perfectly alright as a first friendly hello to an entirely new section. I couldn't figure it out and deleted my comment figuring it wasn't that helpful anyway. So, I'm curious. Did you find out what had happened there? I am very interested to know. Never seen anything like it. Thanks! Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 16:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)