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.

Welcome![edit]

Hi Mac Edmunds! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (February 29)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Unreferenced.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mac Edmunds! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Double Grazing,

I would be happy to include references for added reliability. I am planning to reference place-names, quotations, and the people mentioned in my article. Is there anything in particular that you would like me to reference?

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 07:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing is a fundamental requirement, as it tells us where the information came from, and how reliable the source is. Pretty much every material statement and anything potentially contentious needs to be referenced. So when you give this chap's dates of birth and death – where did you get those from? The claim that his inheritance tax was £32m in today's money – according to whom? And so forth and so on.

In addition to basic verifiability, referencing also serves another important purpose, namely establishing notability. Most subjects, including this, need to show that they meet the WP:GNG general notability guideline, which requires significant coverage (not just passing mentions etc.), directly of the subject, in multiple secondary sources that are independent and reliable.

In fact, Wikipedia articles should ideally be written by summarising what such sources say, and citing each sources against the information it has provided. This would give you the content, referencing/verifiability, and notability all in one go.

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (March 1)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

You cannot cite Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia. Thepeerage.com is a deprecated source and must not be cited either. Source #24 does not appear to be published, and is therefore not acceptable. Source #1 does not work. This means that the content supported by these sources is actually not supported at all. Two sources are then left, one of which does not even mention John Morgan. The extensively cited Argus article does, but it alone is not enough to establish notability per WP:GNG, as we need three or more sources meeting the GNG standard.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DoubleGrazing,

As you have suggested, I removed all citations of Thepeerage.com. I also removed source 1, which I replaced with a citation to the National Library of Wales, and replaced citations for birth dates with ones from the Gwent County Archive.

I hope that these more reliable sources prove creditable to reach the "3 or more GNG standard citations" that you require.

Best Regards, Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (April 30)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Clearfrienda were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Does not meet WP:NBIO or WP:GNG because there is only one independent source (South Wales Argus) that actually mentions the subject. The general standard is 3 or more reliable, independent sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Clear friend a ^💬 23:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Clearfrienda

Thank you for reviewing my article, "John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar".

However, I disagree with your points "there is only one reliable source". I have also referenced other completely reliable sources to meet the "3+ Independent Sources" criteria.

Firstly, I have referenced the National Trust website which is a highly reliable source. To inform you, the National Trust is an organisation in the UK which looks after "heritage conservation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland". They are the current care takers of Tredegar House, so any information I have referenced from their website will be accurate, researched, and backed up by historic documents as the National Trust will only want to provide accurate information.

Secondly, I have also referenced the "Tredegar Estate Records" from The National Library of Wales. As the name suggests, this is also a national organisation which holds an incredible amount of historical documents for Wales, where Tredegar House is located. Similarly to the National Trust, any information referenced from The National Library of Wales will be totally accurate and only based off historical documents and data from the time. Furthermore, as this is a National institute, they will only want to inform the public with reliable information, making them a creditable source.

I have also referenced Gwent Archives. Gwent, in Wales, is the county in which Tredegar House is located. For the same reasons why The National Library of Wales is reliable, Gwent Archives is also reliable. Moreover, as these are archives from the area, they will be even more detailed, ensuring maximum reliability, and fitting the Wikipedia criteria.

Finally, when adding information regarding the sale of Ruperra Castle, I have referenced the official Ruperra Castle website. This will be equally reliable as it is the official website for the castle, meaning they will want to inform using reliable information, all of which will be based of documents from the National Archives, guaranteeing reliability.

To summarise, I believe that all the information I have provided is reliable as it only comes from National institutes, County archives, or official websites which use archival information.

I apologise for this long-winded reply, however I hoped it has helped prove the eligibility of my submission, and that you could re-consider approving it. I also plan to replace image "Cms pcf 1550919.jpg" (an image of artwork by John Morgan) with a more suitable name.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 13:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I declined your article because it does not meet the general notability guidelines for biographies:

People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

Three reliable, independent sources is usually a good rule of thumb on Wikipedia to demonstrate general notability.

I'm not talking about the verifiability of information — I'm talking about using references to prove notability. Sources like the National Trust and the National Library are certainly reliable, but generally don't help with proving notability. We're looking for sources like newspapers, online articles, or books that show the subject has had enough coverage to warrant a Wikipedia article. So far, the only references in your article that help to prove notability are two articles by South Wales Argus.

I recommend finding some more in-depth, reliable, independent sources on the subject and resubmitting.

If you have any other questions or concerns, let me know. Happy editing!

Clear friend a ^💬 21:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Clearfrienda

Thank you for outlining the issues regarding the notability of John Morgan.

Unfortunately, there is very little information about John Morgan, hence I decided to make my Wiki page combining all information. However, I will be sure to conduct further research in an attempt to find more information.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Clearfrienda

I have taken your advice on finding extra independent sources. I have added several since we last spoke. Here is the the new list of independent sources about John Morgan to prove his notability. Entries marked * are new:

"Who's Who and Who Was Who" - Oxford University Press *

"Debts Forgiven In Will" - Birmingham Daily Post, 1963 *

"The New Baron" - Western Mail & South Wales News, 1954 *

"The Last Lord Tredegar" - South Wales Argus

The newly added newspaper articles were found on The British Newspaper Archive, (britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk), and can be found throughout my article and in the "references" section at the bottom of the page, where they have been appropriately citated with the original date, page number, title of article/section, name of publication, and link to the website they were found from.

I have also added a picture of John Morgan in the "infobox" taken from page 7 of the "Western Mail & South Wales News" newspaper, from the 23 August 1954.

Please could you confirm that my independent sources prove his notability appropriately, and that the image of John from the aforementioned newspaper is valid for Wikipedia use, before I resubmit my article.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 17:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I can't say anything "proves" his notability for sure because that's the job of the next reviewer. I will say:

https://www.ukwhoswho.com/ is considered unreliable because of its track record of publishing inaccurate information. It wouldn't count towards notability anyways since most information is self-published (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Who's_Who_(UK)).
The South Wales Argus sources are very in-depth. However, for notability sources should also be independent from each other (so 4 different South Wales Argus articles isn't the same as 4 separate sources)
The two other sources you mentioned are behind a paywall so I can't see how in-depth they are.

Again, I can't comment on what another reviewer will say but I'd recommend trying to find a bit more coverage before resubmitting.

As long as the image is actually in the public domain, it is valid for Wikipedia use.

Let me know if you have any more questions. Happy editing!

Clear friend a ^💬 01:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]