User talk:Mac Edmunds

Welcome!

Hi Mac Edmunds! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (February 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Mac Edmunds! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Double Grazing,

I would be happy to include references for added reliability. I am planning to reference place-names, quotations, and the people mentioned in my article. Is there anything in particular that you would like me to reference?

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 07:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Referencing is a fundamental requirement, as it tells us where the information came from, and how reliable the source is. Pretty much every material statement and anything potentially contentious needs to be referenced. So when you give this chap's dates of birth and death – where did you get those from? The claim that his inheritance tax was £32m in today's money – according to whom? And so forth and so on.

In addition to basic verifiability, referencing also serves another important purpose, namely establishing notability. Most subjects, including this, need to show that they meet the WP:GNG general notability guideline, which requires significant coverage (not just passing mentions etc.), directly of the subject, in multiple secondary sources that are independent and reliable.

In fact, Wikipedia articles should ideally be written by summarising what such sources say, and citing each sources against the information it has provided. This would give you the content, referencing/verifiability, and notability all in one go.

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (March 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello DoubleGrazing,

As you have suggested, I removed all citations of Thepeerage.com. I also removed source 1, which I replaced with a citation to the National Library of Wales, and replaced citations for birth dates with ones from the Gwent County Archive.

I hope that these more reliable sources prove creditable to reach the "3 or more GNG standard citations" that you require.

Best Regards, Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar (April 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Clearfrienda were:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Clearfrienda ^💬 23:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Clearfrienda

Thank you for reviewing my article, "John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar".

However, I disagree with your points "there is only one reliable source". I have also referenced other completely reliable sources to meet the "3+ Independent Sources" criteria.

Firstly, I have referenced the National Trust website which is a highly reliable source. To inform you, the National Trust is an organisation in the UK which looks after "heritage conservation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland". They are the current care takers of Tredegar House, so any information I have referenced from their website will be accurate, researched, and backed up by historic documents as the National Trust will only want to provide accurate information.

Secondly, I have also referenced the "Tredegar Estate Records" from The National Library of Wales. As the name suggests, this is also a national organisation which holds an incredible amount of historical documents for Wales, where Tredegar House is located. Similarly to the National Trust, any information referenced from The National Library of Wales will be totally accurate and only based off historical documents and data from the time. Furthermore, as this is a National institute, they will only want to inform the public with reliable information, making them a creditable source.

I have also referenced Gwent Archives. Gwent, in Wales, is the county in which Tredegar House is located. For the same reasons why The National Library of Wales is reliable, Gwent Archives is also reliable. Moreover, as these are archives from the area, they will be even more detailed, ensuring maximum reliability, and fitting the Wikipedia criteria.

Finally, when adding information regarding the sale of Ruperra Castle, I have referenced the official Ruperra Castle website. This will be equally reliable as it is the official website for the castle, meaning they will want to inform using reliable information, all of which will be based of documents from the National Archives, guaranteeing reliability.

To summarise, I believe that all the information I have provided is reliable as it only comes from National institutes, County archives, or official websites which use archival information.

I apologise for this long-winded reply, however I hoped it has helped prove the eligibility of my submission, and that you could re-consider approving it. I also plan to replace image "Cms pcf 1550919.jpg" (an image of artwork by John Morgan) with a more suitable name.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 13:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

I declined your article because it does not meet the general notability guidelines for biographies:

People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

Three reliable, independent sources is usually a good rule of thumb on Wikipedia to demonstrate general notability.

I'm not talking about the verifiability of information — I'm talking about using references to prove notability. Sources like the National Trust and the National Library are certainly reliable, but generally don't help with proving notability. We're looking for sources like newspapers, online articles, or books that show the subject has had enough coverage to warrant a Wikipedia article. So far, the only references in your article that help to prove notability are two articles by South Wales Argus.

I recommend finding some more in-depth, reliable, independent sources on the subject and resubmitting.

If you have any other questions or concerns, let me know. Happy editing!

Clearfrienda ^💬 21:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Clearfrienda

Thank you for outlining the issues regarding the notability of John Morgan.

Unfortunately, there is very little information about John Morgan, hence I decided to make my Wiki page combining all information. However, I will be sure to conduct further research in an attempt to find more information.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Clearfrienda

I have taken your advice on finding extra independent sources. I have added several since we last spoke. Here is the the new list of independent sources about John Morgan to prove his notability. Entries marked * are new:

"Who's Who and Who Was Who" - Oxford University Press *

"Debts Forgiven In Will" - Birmingham Daily Post, 1963 *

"The New Baron" - Western Mail & South Wales News, 1954 *

"The Last Lord Tredegar" - South Wales Argus

The newly added newspaper articles were found on The British Newspaper Archive, (britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk), and can be found throughout my article and in the "references" section at the bottom of the page, where they have been appropriately citated with the original date, page number, title of article/section, name of publication, and link to the website they were found from.

I have also added a picture of John Morgan in the "infobox" taken from page 7 of the "Western Mail & South Wales News" newspaper, from the 23 August 1954.

Please could you confirm that my independent sources prove his notability appropriately, and that the image of John from the aforementioned newspaper is valid for Wikipedia use, before I resubmit my article.

Best Regards,

Mac Edmunds Mac Edmunds (talk) 17:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

I can't say anything "proves" his notability for sure because that's the job of the next reviewer. I will say:

• https://www.ukwhoswho.com/ is considered unreliable because of its track record of publishing inaccurate information. It wouldn't count towards notability anyways since most information is self-published (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Who's_Who_(UK)).
• The South Wales Argus sources are very in-depth. However, for notability sources should also be independent from each other (so 4 different South Wales Argus articles isn't the same as 4 separate sources)
• The two other sources you mentioned are behind a paywall so I can't see how in-depth they are.

Again, I can't comment on what another reviewer will say but I'd recommend trying to find a bit more coverage before resubmitting.

As long as the image is actually in the public domain, it is valid for Wikipedia use.

Let me know if you have any more questions. Happy editing!

Clearfrienda ^💬 01:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

A shared interest

Hi, by a very roundabout route, I find you are working on a draft of an article I’ve planned to write for some time, that of John, last Lord Tredegar. You’ve done an excellent job of pulling such sources as there are together. Would you be interested in collaborating on it? There’s some work to be done but I’m reasonably confident it could be got over the AfC line. Let me know. KJP1 (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @KJP1

Good to find someone similarly interested in John's life, and thank you for your compliments on my draft. Yes - that does sound interesting. What are you thinking of contributing?

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 10:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

You've done the hard work of gathering the sources. What I think it needs is a copy-edit, as there are a few things that don't currently meet Wikipedia requirements. Examples include:

• Use of the first name - He should be Morgan, not John, e.g. " John sells Ruppera";
• Personal opinions - we tend not to use these, e.g. "This clever decision", "Sadly, it was to no avail";
• Quotes - this shouldn't be italicised, e.g. "the sale was good for his bank balance, and his soul";
• Capitalisation - there's a fair few words that shouldn't be capitalised, e.g. "Peer, Landowner, House, Golf"
• Conversions - we have a template for these, e.g. "for £40,000 or £1,200,000 in today's money";
• Sources - we can't use Youtube as a source, and I'm not sure it's adding much. Many of the others, e.g. the British Newspaper Archive ones, are paywalled, and this should be indicated. We should have page numbers for book sources, as well as the book details, ISBN etc, for this like Paul Busby.
• Further reading - those that are used as Sources shouldn't be here;
• Paragraphs - there are quite a few one-sentence para.s that should be combined. There's also a part where the chronology flips, Evan's mentioned twice.
• Wording - there are a few oddities, e.g. "Retirement". From what, as he appears never to have worked?

If you like, I could have a go, and you could see what you think. If you don't like it, reversion is easy. KJP1 (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @KJP1

Wow - That is all really useful! As you suggest, I think it would be more convenient for the both of us if you corrected my errors, to avoid constant messaging back-and-forth.

With regards to the Paul Busby book citation, that can be replaced with the YouTube podcast citation (also by Paul Busby), for ease.

Although I agree with all of your other suggestions, I am keen to keep the YouTube citation. Although it is social media, and therefore arguably less reliable, it is a podcast on the history of the Morgans and Tredegar, by Paul Busby and Goff Morgan - both notable historians. Furthermore, all information in the podcast would have been thoroughly, and based off of Newspaper articles and other reliable sources.

Perhaps, if it has to be removed, it could be added to the "further reading" section, as it does include a lot of information regarding John's life.

What do you think?

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 13:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Give me a day, and you can see what you think. The trouble with YouTube is that it’s not really a WP:Reliable source, but let’s see. KJP1 (talk) 17:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

P.s. Are Paul Busby and Goff Morgan academic historians? I like their podcasts, although they are a little too long for my taste!, but had understood they were more local enthusiasts than professional historians. KJP1 (talk) 17:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I am unsure. Both proclaim to be "historians" in all of their profiles, but no mention of whether academic. I look forward to see the results of your work!

By the way, I am located in Wales, U.K, for a reference of what times I am likely to reply.

My Best,

Mac Edmunds (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

It is probably best if we now move this discussion to the Draft article Talkpage. I've copied all this over for ease. And you can see my first run at a re-draft. I hope you like it. KJP1 (talk) 07:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)