User talk:AnthonyCamp

Welcome

Welcome...

Hello, AnthonyCamp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Lumos3 (talk) 15:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much; that is very helpful. There is much to learn but I hope to make a small contribution where I can.AnthonyCamp (talk) 19:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Frederick Augusta Barnard

Thank you for your edits to the article. However, citing your own book as a source and as a valid reason for removing/altering sections of the article is not acceptable. The sources which brought you to the conclusions you arrived at in your book, are the ones which should be cited. I'm sure you can see the reasoning underpinning this argument. ciao Rotational (talk) 07:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate what you say but you will understand my annoyance and dismay to see my website (which merely lists the name of Frederick Augusta Bernard) quoted along with Miss Paintin apparently to support your statement that he was the son of Frederick, Prince of Wales, something that is very clearly rejected by Miss Paintin in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (as it was in her earlier articles) as well as by the greater detail of my book. I have today spent time in expanding and correcting the Wikipedia article with references to published material and to other contemporary sources mentioned in my book, but find the page blocked. It is a deeply unsatisfactory state of affairs that incorrect and discredited material should be protected in this way. AnthonyCamp (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey - if you are convinced that the 1743 date is correct (instead of the 1742 that nearly every Googled site lists), then change the Bernard wikipage completely, OK? There are about 3 places (including Category:1742 births) that would need to be corrected. One last time - you are taking on the world if you think he was born in 1743. Just sayin' . . . .Raymondwinn (talk) 02:11, 29 October 2010 (UTC).

Thank you. I have amended the Category entry. So far as I am aware the only contemporary source that provides a date of birth is the baptismal entry at St James. I am sorry if I am at variance with the rest of the world. That is the fate of all those who do original research. Their books sadly have a very limited circulation! AnthonyCamp (talk) 15:20, 29 October 2010 (UTC).

Wessex children NPOV

Hullo there. I have opened a new discussion about the styling of HRH The Earl of Wessex's children: here because their articles are currently in violation of the NPOV policy. Do please drop by and have your say (and feel free to pass on the word to other concerned parties!) DBD 21:58, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Queen Victoria matrilineal line

Hi Anthony (or more formally, Greetings, Mr. Camp), I am writing in regards of (well, I'm actually hoping!) if it might be possible if you could fix (correct) the matrilineal line of Queen Victoria, please? Wikipedia takes it back quite some way, but not as far back as you mention in Everyone Has Roots. Plus, I'm not even sure if it's correct. Might you compile a list for me, please, or something, and place it on my talk page, or on some talk page (of course, only if you want to, and whether and whenever you have time)? If I can do anything in return, please just let me know. Thank you! --Are-One-Be (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

How interesting! I first became aware of this descent when asked by Lord Mountbatten to check a pedigree which he was intent on publishing in his The Mountbatten Lineage and which came from Otto Forst de Battaglia's Traite de Genealogie 1949). I published my thoughts in The Genealogists' Magazine [the journal of the Society of Genealogists in London] for December 1960 (vol. 13, no. 8, pages 241-244) where there is a table on the last page (which continues that in an earlier Magazine, vol. 3 (1927) pages 6-9). Four years later the late Charles F. H. Evans, a great expert on these matters, made further observations on this, correcting the descent, in the same Magazine for March 1964 (vol. 14, no. 9, pages 273-277). I am not aware that anyone has since published anything on the tentative descent there set out. I trust that you will be able to see copies of these articles without too much difficulty. AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC).

Thank you for that information, and nice chatting with you! --Are-One-Be (talk) 12:39, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Vera Bate Lombardi

Hello:
I noticed your comments on this page; I've made a reply to them there.
I would say though that looking at your userpage you seem to be something of a specialist in this area. I have to tell you that, though welcome, WP can be a frustrating and/or unrewarding environment for experts of any stripe. Our requirements for neutrality and our reliance on material that has already passed the threshold of peer review, or an editorial board, can be difficult for anyone with an original or specialized viewpoint, while presenting your own published work for inclusion can be a bit of a minefield. But certainly not impossible. Regards, Swanny18 (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Langtry Manor

Hi Anthony. I'd like to thank you very much for your most excellent and thorough research work on this curiously misattributed house. I'm trying to tidy up the article and the references/citations to meet Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I notice that two of your citations refer to the Principal Probate Registry (PPR) but do not have year dates. Could you possibly supply the years? (I'm guessing that since the deaths were both in September/October the year date for the probate registry may be for the following year for each death.

Here are the items in question:

The Revd George Bennett died at the Red House, 5 September 1915. His widow, Caroline Elizabeth Bennett, died there 4 September 1937.

References

Thanking you in advance, Softlavender (talk) 23:54, 28 December 2015 (UTC).

Thank you very much indeed for your very kind words, but it is I who should be thanking you for your work on this article and for improving it considerably. I have checked my notes from the Principal Probate Registry calendars and the will of George Bennett was proved in London by his widow on 24 September 1915 and the will of Caroline Elizabeth Bennett was proved also in London on 12 October 1937. Both indicate some very fast work by their London solicitors! Today it would take quite a lot longer. These entries are online in the subscription website ancestry.co.uk. Thank you again for all your trouble.AnthonyCamp (talk) 11:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC).

Great! Thanks. :-) One (final) pair of dates, if you perhaps have them, this time for the two Crockford's references:

Shortly afterwards The Red House was occupied (and it seems owned) by the Revd George Bennett, former Head Master of Sarum Cathedral School (1881–90) and Rector of Folke, Dorset (1890–1903) and later Vicar of Rodmersham, Kent (1903–5) and Rector of West Quantoxhead, Bridgwater (1907–11). Bennett was, in fact, described as of the Red House in 1898, so he had presumably let the house to Colonel Legh for a short time.

References

Cheers, Softlavender (talk) 12:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the dates of his early career came from Crockford, 1898, page 104, and then those for his later career from his obituary in the Western Gazette for 1 October 1915, page 5. I looked quickly at a later Crockford just to see that those later dates were correct but (slackly!) did not note any specific one, so perhaps that reference should be to the Western Gazette. Thank you once more. AnthonyCamp (talk) 13:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC).

Great! All airtight now. Thanks again for your great research work. Without your research, it would never have come to light that this whole facade and elaborate fable about the hotel is a house of cards. I had fun filling in some of the details and refining it. Often it takes teamwork on Wikipedia for an article to take its best shape. I admire your due diligence, and hope someday you might like to re-publish your book with all of the corrections on this and other matters that you have unearthed since you first published it. Happy 2016, and happy editing if you continue to spend time on Wikipedia! Softlavender (talk) 14:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Cheers, Anthony! Hope you are well. I'm stopping by to let you know that we do not use "op. cit." or "ibid." in Wikipedia citations, because any given single reference could get moved or removed. I have therefore fleshed out all of your citations on Lillie Langtry. One alternative is to list the work once in a section called "Sources", and then format individual citations in the format of: Surname (year), p. __. -- Softlavender (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

By the way, please let me know if you ever re-publish your book with all of your new information. Thanks again for your great research! Softlavender (talk) 15:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC).

Thank you very much indeed for your kind words and further help with this article and my poor efforts on Wikipedia. I published that book myself in 2007 because I could not find a commercial publisher who showed the slightest interest in it and I had wasted much time on futile correspondence and unanswered letters. I doubt that that situation will have changed and so although I would very much like to see a new edition, I have to be realistic and doubt that I shall live to see it. AnthonyCamp (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC).

Hmmm. Don't you think that with all of your new information, some of it rather explosive, more people might be interested in publishing it? Especially in this climate of very popular TV series and miniseries about monarchs? If I have any ideas, I'll let you know. Anyway, I certainly hope it happens! Softlavender (talk) 08:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

March 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but it appears you have written or added to an article about yourself, at Anthony J. Camp. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. PamD 14:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC).

Thank you for your interest in my biography. The basic details of my biography have been on my Wikipedia User Page and on my web site since 2008 and I have not previously received any comment about their accuracy. Many of the details appeared in "Who's Who in Genealogy and Heraldry" (Gale, 1981; Filby & Meyer, 1990) and in "Debrett's People of Today" from 1990 to 1997, and they have appeared annually in "Who's Who" since 1993. AnthonyCamp (talk) 10:37, 30 March 2018 (UTC).

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AnthonyCamp. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AnthonyCamp. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Almeria Carpenter, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Richmond, Annan and Caroline, Princess of Wales (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Phyllis Marion Gotch

Hello, I created an article for Phyllis Marion Gotch and you recently added a citation to this article saying that the authorship of a book attributed to her has been challenged. It is titled Once I had a home: the diary and narrative of Nadejda, lady of honour to Their Imperial Majesties, etc.. By coincidence there is a member of the Narishkin family buried in our Sussex village (David Vadim Vadimovich Narishkin) and I have been in correspondence with his half sister Vera (I believe she is second or third cousin of Obolensky) and obtained a copy of Prince Serge Obolensky's book "One man in his time". I have tried to find the reference you referred to on page 147 but so far have failed to find it. Any help you could provide on the wording of this section of text would help me to locate it. I wonder if Gotch co-authored or edited the book? She is still given as the author in the British Library catalogue. Ted Sidpickle (talk) 20:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC).

Thank you for your interest and I have given some further details of the claim and of the family members on the Talk Page of your article on Gotch. The reference at the bottom of page 147 of Prince Obolensky's book is given there in full. His mother was a Narishkin and I give reference to the pedigree of the family in Nicolas Ikonnikov's "La Noblesse de Russie", Tome K.1, pages 189-263 (Paris, 1960). That pedigree shows the connection to the illegitimate Vadime Alexandrovitch Narychkine (died 1952) under No 346. AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC).

Thanks for the update. The husband of Phyllis Gotch, supposedly Marquis de Verdieres, was a wrong'un. However, I cannot pin-point a reliable source to confirm, so I was unable to put down any of my findings about his family in the article. A newspaper piece in a French newspaper when he married Gotch called him Andre Schlossmacher. His father seems to be Georges Emmanuel Jean Schlossmacher 1851-1937. His mother probably Louise de Plàsman who died in 1900. However his stepmother was Marie Mathilde Icard 1867-1955 and her family can be traced back to Philippe Joseph Xavier de VERDIERE (see web page [Quelques illustrations de la lignée de Raismes http://www.virnot-de-lamissart.com/Raismes.html], search on Georges Schlossmacher). The story of the father, Schlossmacher and stepmother Icard, gets complicated with them divorcing in Monaco, however what makes it interesting is that the divorce notice calls her Dame Mathilde Icard de Verdieres. During the WWII it seems that Andre Schlossmacher/de Verdieres may have been a Nazi collaborator. There are two references in published French books indicating this, but not enough evidence to publish in Wikipedia. I never found out what happened to him despite trying making enquiries about the trials of collaborators in France. As you probably know Schlossmacher is a German name and I believe they came from Alsace-Lorraine area originally and one of their relations was someone in the Royal Court and lucky to survive an accusation of treason, although I need to dig out the details to confirm to facts. One of Andre Schlossmacher's uncles was a well known brass foundry manufacturer and known for producing brass lamps.

Sidpickle (talk) 21:02, 14 December 2019 (UTC) Ted

Just an update to last entry: I was wrong about the treason issue related to an ancestor, it was on the de Plasman side of the Schlossmacher family and related to the events of the French Revolution. This de Plasman was father of author Louis C De Plasman who in turn was grandfather of Louise de Plasman (believed to be mother of Andre Schlossmacher/de Verdieres). I do have correspondence somewhere from a member of the family who had some genealogy records from an aunt (now deceased). The records indicate that she ostracised Andre but would not disclose the reason, so that link has now been lost!

Sidpickle (talk) 12:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC) Ted

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Sobieski Stuarts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Waterloo, Hackney, Berwick, Gaelic, Trafalgar and Robert Chambers

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Olive Serres (Hannah Lightfoot article)

Greetings, Thank you so much for your correction to my edit. On Olive's article it reads that she first claimed to be an illegitimate daughter of Cumberland, then later revised her story, so apparently that's where I got confused. I understand she revised her story a few times! Today I also found your webpage with information about this and other pretenders and found it quite interesting reading. Cheers. History Lunatic (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)History Lunatic

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lillie Langtry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Red House.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Hi Anthony, I just wanted to give you this to thank you for all of your diligent efforts in rooting out facts and towards preserving truth and accuracy on Wikipedia and elsewhere. Softlavender (talk) 05:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I greatly appreciate your very kind thought and your trouble in expressing it in this generous manner. Anthony. AnthonyCamp (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)