SchroCat
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
| Articles seeking peer review before featured article candidacy |
|---|
|
| Unanswered peer reviews here. |
New FAC and PR edit
To any friendly talk page watchers, I have:
If there is anyone who fancies commenting, I would be grateful. Cheers - SchroCat (talk)
Output edit
Hello SchroCat, sorry for this. But would you like to leave your output on the AM DB9 nomination? (The source review and image review have thankfully been concluded). Best, 750h+ | Talk 10:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi 750+, I will do. I'm just leaving it open for others before I come in - partly because I've gone over it too recently and want to read with a fresh pair of eyes, and partly because I have promised a couple of other reviews first. I've got it watchlisted, however, and I will be there at some point (it's going to take six weeks or so to get through, so there's plenty of time!) Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh okay, thanks for the response. 750h+ | Talk 10:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @SchroCat:, note that the nomination has three supports 😁! 750h+ | Talk 17:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Excellent. You’ve got a few others lined up to look over it too, and I am waiting for the right point to weigh in, so it’s all looking very positive at the moment. - SchroCat (talk) 04:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi SchroCat (I deeply deeply apologise for the number of messages I’ve sent) but the DB9’s promotion is imminent (Nb-seven supports; we’re just waiting on Hog Farm to make it eight) (Nb2-thanks for the peer review and your input on the FAC!); David Fuchs allowed me to promote another article, and so that shall be this one, the Aston Martin Rapide. Would you mind taking a look at it? Best, 750h+ | Talk 16:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Excellent. You’ve got a few others lined up to look over it too, and I am waiting for the right point to weigh in, so it’s all looking very positive at the moment. - SchroCat (talk) 04:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Sapper's Wife (H. C. McNeile) edit
According to birth and marriage records, accessible at FreeBMD, in the third quarter of 1891 Violet Evelyn B Douglas was born; in the fourth quarter of 1914 Herman C McNeile married Violet B Douglas; and in the fourth quarter of 1916 Michael A M McNeile was born to a mother with the maiden name of Baird-Douglas. It seems fairly clear from that information that her surname was not simply Baird, but Douglas, or possibly Baird-Douglas. So referring to her as simply "Baird" is erroneous. What exactly do the Sources you quote say ? RGCorris (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well that’s a lot of WP:OR you’ve got going on. Exactly, the ONDB says “On 31 October 1914 he married Violet Baird (b. 1890/91), daughter of Lieutenant-Colonel Arthur Sholto Douglas of the Cameron Highlanders.” It’s possible that, as with some families, there is a difference in the names for sons and daughters. It’s not uncommon in some social circles. My family, for example, has men using double barrelled surnames, but women have the first part of the surname as the last of their forenames, and the second part of the surname as their only surname. It’s possible this is the case here. Either way, the ONDB trumps the OR and referring to her as Baird in entirely correct. - SchroCat (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)