User talk:Nonesense101

Marquesses of Sligo

Hello. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia: it is based on information documented in reliable sources, not on "original research". Whatever information you may have, or think you have, about the 11th Marquess needs to be documented in reliable sources; only then can it be added to Wikipedia. If you insist on trying to push your changes through without documentation, they will continue to be reverted and you may be blocked. Choess (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of sligo

Hello my information i obtain direct from the house of lords and i was advised that the last marquess was indeed 10th marquess and futher to this the 11th marquess was of an illigiate line there as stated if you look into it he states his mother to be gauche while on his birth cert his mother is chapman there is a lot of untruths on the net i have got mine for definate Nonesense101 (talk) 22:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We must have the information listed on the page itself for verification. What you're claiming is contrary to what is in the existing content on the page and as far as I can tell, reliable well known publications such as [1] or [2]. Please do not restore the content unless it is directly supported by a citation to a reliable source –72 _(talk) 23:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of sligo

Mine was from house of lords i would ask the papers and assocated persons to make definate before changing

Nonesense101 (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this, and I'm not sure my point took. In this case, "reliable sources" for us is whatever is printed in works of reference like Debrett's, Burke's Peerage, newspapers, and so on. "Original research" is what you're doing—taking some sort of unpublished document and drawing your own inferences from it about the 11th Marquess. That is not accepted at Wikipedia, in part because of the risk of getting it wrong—for instance, if the 11th Marquess really didn't have the right to succeed, it would have passed to the current holder of the title in 1991 and not gone extinct, which doesn't seem to accord with your earlier edits.

If you really think the world has got it wrong and the 11th Marquess should not have succeeded to the title, Wikipedia is the wrong place to be. You need to write to Debrett's and Burke's and so forth and convince them to correct their entries about the Marquesses of Sligo. But until you've convinced authorities like that to render a judgment in favor of your evidence, there's no use trying to edit it into Wikipedia; you're just going to be reverted and maybe blocked. Just because Wikipedia is the easiest place to edit with new information doesn't mean it's the right place. Choess (talk) 01:38, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of sligo

You are quite correct burkes peerage is not recignised by the house of lords you claim to know british peerage maybe this is for you to seek this information placing false edits on wikipedia like what some people are doing is only adding to false inuendo the titles have been dormont since 1991 who ever published there was in the first place is wrong. The titles are still to be given out just to the right person Nonesense101 (talk) 12:47, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning

You don't seem to have understood what I was trying to explain above. At this point you have two choices:

You can take your birth certificates or documents or whatever to the newspapers, the House of Lords, Burke's Peerage, Debrett's, and so on and tell them "Jeremy was never really the 11th Marquess, correct your publications!" AFTER they issue a correction, we will update his Wikipedia article.
You can keep on trying to change his article based on documents in your possession and your original research. In this case, you will be blocked and the article may be protected if you keep trying to change it.

Whether or not your information is true, we're not going to include it in Wikipedia until other sources, like the ones I've mentioned, agree that it is true. I don't know how to make this any more clear. Choess (talk) 13:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of sligo

I have been in contact for your information the house of lords dont entertain these site i am merely stating what is correct i will be notifilying papers burkes peerage are aware of the deception that took place they cant change a publication made in 2003. Now for treats of bloking i do take serious i will have all this "11th marquess of sligo" nonsence put right and it is you who will be blocked and anyone else that tries these to intimade me as i told you before for yor own sake contact the house of lords for the correct information Nonesense101 (talk) 14:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of sligo

For your information which you dont seem to have much of from a couple of acticles. I am talking fact house of lords and espcially the crown office do not give out information FACT. Burkes peerage NOW revert people to the crown office as they admit certan untruths of the past.And finally look for yourself on find my past.com i it will reveal a great deal. Nonesense101 (talk) 14:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Choess (talk) 13:48, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Jeremy Browne, 11th Marquess of Sligo. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maequess of sligo

Hi rickinbaltamore I accept your block that you have imposed. However i did point out to choess that my information is not made avalable online as the crown office dont pulish such information.I obtained mine from the office direct. As regards his illigitate/adopted state that is very true Jeremys father married jose gauche which is true. But his mother is jose chapman ???. Odviously to different people which is on findmypast.com viewable to all. Also funny a man never mention in house of lords sure he admitted himself" I wasnt bothered about the seat", Why one asks with the annual wage paid from there would have gone some way on running a house like westport house. Never a visit from the royal family when they came to ireland by any of them lord montbatton included very odd " am i rising an eyebrow yet". I did recieve a msg from burkes peerage who are aware of false information namely 11th and 12th not holding seats. I am contacting other sources of information to have them correct this wrong. Finally to add choess menionted jeremy as a fine irish nobleman. Odviously they didnt take my advice about find my past .com because of his mothers name and he is an english man born 8 phillimore gardens kengsinton Nonesense101 (talk) 14:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly advice

@Nonesense101:, my name is Eggishorn and I came across your edits and thought it might be helpful to add some advice. I am not an administrator, merely another editor like yourself with a fair bit of experience in Wikipedia and its ways. I can see that you strongly feel that there is an injustice in the article about the Marquessate of Sligo. No-one is denying that you feel this strongly. No-one even wants to deny you the opportunity to correct wrong information. The problem with what you have been trying to do so far is that we can't just take your word about this. What you are saying is, in effect, "Trust me, I'm right. Why don't you believe me?" Wikipedia doesn't work through trust or claims of being right. Wikipedia works through presenting reliable sources that demonstrate what we want to say. The simple fact of the matter is that you haven't given anyone any reason to think you are either right or wrong.

Look at it this way: Wikipedia is a project made up of over 130,000 active editors. In order to try to create some sense of order out of the chaos of >130,000 individual opinions, we agree to follow certain policies and guidelines. An editor that arms them-self with an understanding of those rules can use them to help correct wrong information. An editor that arms them-self with nothing but what they see as the truth, however, will change neither those rules nor wrong information.

I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]