User talk:Mabuska/Archive 42010/November
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Ross-of-Bladensburg
General Robert Ross' surname was Ross, never Ross-of-Bladensburg. It was his descendants who were given the surname "Ross-of-Bladensburg". I corrected these things in the article on Rostrevor but you reverted it as unsourced. The source for the facts surrounding Ross' family name is "A Complete Guide to Heraldry" by Arthur Charles Fox-Davies (published 1909), pages 113, 474, 593, 374. The book is also online and the passage on page 593 can be found here: http://www.archive.org/stream/completeguidetoh00foxdrich#page/592/mode/2up Regards, ViennaUK (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
The small barnstar, for gnomish work
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| This barnstar is for quickly finding a Reference for Aughnacloy, County Down. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC) |
Aww cheers! :-) Mabuska (talk) 22:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Nature of the sources
Hi Mabuska, I noticed you added refimrovesect to Áed_Oirdnide#Nature_of_the_sources. Since the information here hardly seem controversial (IMO) and some references are already added, I wonder if you could be more specific about what needs additional referencing. I may be able to help. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 14:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- For all we know the sources used may apply to only a part of the statement or the last sentence. Maybe they apply to the entire section and for ease of editing where put at the end of each paragraph. I've seen styles where the source is put after each different sentence. Maybe its a confusion of manual of styles.
Hi there. I just wanted to make sure you saw this. Yes the article is crappy. I never came back to it, and may have left this or that in the stub which is a little hmm or whatever. But at least it looks interesting and notable, or I hope so. DinDraithou (talk) 15:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've responded on the talk page and removed the tag. Mabuska (talk) 18:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've added a new tag and then done some cleanup. The article is still pathetic but looks a little more respectable now. DinDraithou (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)