Boscaswell

Welcome

Welcome!

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

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 08:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Agatha Christie aka "dude"

Nice find! I've read one biography and numerous biographical articles about her but had never heard about the surfing. Who knew? Rivertorch (talk) 04:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

It's a news story in the UK. Some research has been done recently on papers of hers, I think, and this came out of it. Actually, I added something on the Article about it at almost precisely the same time as another editor and deleted my edit as his was more complete [tho less well written IMO!]. But it is pretty amazing...the Daily Telegraph story in particular - clearly she loved surfing! Boscaswell (talk) 08:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Keep up the good work! TomaHawk61 (talk) 01:40, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Oliver Anthony

On 22 August 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Oliver Anthony, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. (yes, this is a self-praising post, but hey, I don’t get too much recognition on here. *sniff* 😉 ) Boscaswell talk 10:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Oliver Anthony

On 13 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oliver Anthony, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "Rich Men North of Richmond" by Oliver Anthony was the first single to chart at number one on the Billboard Hot 100 with no previous chart history for its artist? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oliver Anthony. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oliver Anthony), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—Kusma (talk) 12:33, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

"Polling status" of Reform UK

Hi there. Thanks for your message. Before my edit, the text showed just that Reform had "surged to within 2% of the Conservatives". That is true, but does not reflect current polling. I wanted to bring the article up to date with the latest polling. (Some people seem determined to remove this!). There were subsequent edits to improve the phrasing, which I adopted into my update. I have also added citations. Tompw (talk) 12:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi there :-) One minor correction to your message: I never deleted the text saying that Reform UK moved within 2% of the Conservatives. In fact, I added a citation. It's an important fact I believe should be left in. On that we agree!

Now, if it suitable to say that a poll showed them 2% behind, then it is also suitable to say subsequent polls (plural) then showed something different. That is also "correct, notable, and current". Please do not accuse someone of edit warring for adding correct, notable, current information with citations. You are the person removing it, for some reason. So one quick question - why do you want to remove this information?. Because I'm puzzled about that.

If the article on Labour pointed out they reached over 50% in the polls at the end of 2022, then I'm sure you would agree that it should also say they are now in the mid-40s.

The polling history shows that (1) there was an increase after Farage took over; (2) there was a fall afterwards. Either both facts are worthy of inclusion, or neither facts are worthy of inclusion. As things stand, both are included in the article in the "2024 general election" section. If you wish to move it elsewhere in the article or add further, more recent information, feel free!

Tompw (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Tompw you added the citation for one poll, Deltapoll, and in the text wrote polls in the plural. The polls show widely different results, that’s agreed, but as I believe I’ve pointed out on your talk page, there is now a YouGov poll showing a 1% deficit to the Tories. This is major. Then there has been Redfield and Winton repeating their earlier 2%, but this time polling 10,000 individuals. Yes, there’s been 9%, and more, but very much mainly less, and it is this plain fact which is different to the deficit to the Tories which Reform experienced before Farage resumed leadership and it is this which justifies its inclusion in para. 1 of the lede. The line I’ve written is supported by 2 cited RS's and at least one not cited (Reuters). So please just leave things as they are. Thank you. Boscaswell talk 21:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

You are correct I said polls, plural, in my reply; the text says "a subsequent poll". I will make it clear (with citations) that there were multiple polls with a larger gap, then two recent ones with a small gap. Good catch! Tompw (talk) 12:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)