User talk:82.14.227.91

Joe Longthorne

I could not fully comprehend your edit summary here [1] are you saying this info is not in that source ? --DBig Xrayᗙ 10:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I didn't understand that either. He describes his family background in the book, you can read it at the Google Books link. --Lord Belbury (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am saying, it is a safe bet that in this, and other articles like it, in which the person has at least one autobiography, pretty much every citation can draw from an autobiography as a reference. So long as you use the relevant page numbers in each citation, why bother with any other source. 82.14.227.91 (talk) 05:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not suggesting this be adopted, it was sarcasm. 82.14.227.91 (talk) 16:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Peck

Hi there - I am the one who added massive amounts of content to the Gregory Peck article over the past 3 or so weeks, most notably info on various reviewers comments upon release and recently. Based on some other comments and a lot of personal thought, it seemed the article was getting way to long. I decided to put the long quotes of critics opinions into lettered notes so people could look at them easily if they wanted to. Do you not think this is worthwhile? I see you have deleted some of the codes that do that leaving them just sitting in the article at the current time. Please respond.Informed analysis (talk) 02:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen your changes, I noted there were many double curly endquotes "}}" following endrefs without any corresponding double curly openquotes. That was until I noticed an Extended Footnote which I now realise I had deleted the endquotes from, and clearly many more. I could not find the corresponding label for the footnote list name=TheYearlingModern, plus I don't know what is following that. I was in the process of learning the efn template. I do not think it a bad idea, however, from bitter personal experience, I think any contribution to Wiki is never truly worthwhile. Nothing but criticism and bullying. 82.14.227.91 (talk) 03:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know what you mean about the criticism and bullying!! I am glad you said that. I find contradictory info in the same article and try to fix it and people get mad. I just learned the efn template 2 hours ago myself - just to use it in this article. But all the stuff I was going to put into it is stuff I added in the past 3 weeks. I think the reference changes that someone else made about 30 minutes before you may have caused a problem (it used some {{ s also). I cannot find easy ways to fix some of the problems. I'm gonna quit for tonight as I am tired. If you want to try to fix it (or not) feel free.Informed analysis (talk) 03:13, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought you were blanking part of a citation template--when I saw this on your talk page I looked again and realized I was wrong. Sorry. Drmies (talk) 04:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'll save yourself a lot of trouble if you remember to include edit summaries. Unexplained removal of text on a substantial scale tends to get reverted. Favonian (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.