Talk:Lloyd G. Davies
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Nationality in lede[edit]
Is there some reason not to go with MOSBIO? I now understand what your edit summary meant, but still should go with nationality in lede. --Malerooster (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- It is just silly to put the nationality of a person in the lede when that person's nationality is plainly obvious from the context. That's like saying that Elizabeth II is a (insert nationality here; I'm sure she has a lot of them) is Queen of England, Scotland, Canada, Australia, etc., or that Barack Obama is an American politician. In many respects that MOSBIO you cited is just ridiculous. Sorry I am waxing indignant, but that is the way I feel. I have written scores of articles about Notable Americans, and in none of them have I chosen to name their nationalities when it is just obvious that they are Americans. Hope this answers your question, and I hope you have a good day. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I hear what you are saying, but I sort of disagree in THIS case. Was this person known mainly for being a US politician or something else? I would probably rewrite the lede to reflect what this person is primarialy known for and include nationality. I am a stickler for including nationality in ALL bios except maybe the .01% that you mentioned above. I think the MOSBIO is actually very helpful and needed in order to maintain a consistancy for ALL bio ledes. Not a huge deal, especially on a bio so limitly edited. Cheers, --Malerooster (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I can't believe what you are saying. Nationality in all ledes? Nonsense, if you will pardon the expression. Use your head, man. Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- Not all, but yes, 99.98%. --Malerooster (talk) 17:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I don't usually get so worked up over things like this, so I apologize for my vehemence. Just one question here, and then we will go on in a cooler fashion: How did you determine that Davies was an American? GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- Not all, but yes, 99.98%. --Malerooster (talk) 17:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I can't believe what you are saying. Nationality in all ledes? Nonsense, if you will pardon the expression. Use your head, man. Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I hear what you are saying, but I sort of disagree in THIS case. Was this person known mainly for being a US politician or something else? I would probably rewrite the lede to reflect what this person is primarialy known for and include nationality. I am a stickler for including nationality in ALL bios except maybe the .01% that you mentioned above. I think the MOSBIO is actually very helpful and needed in order to maintain a consistancy for ALL bio ledes. Not a huge deal, especially on a bio so limitly edited. Cheers, --Malerooster (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Unexplained edits[edit]
I reverted these unexplained edits because (1) Davies did not just "serve" on the City Council, he actually was a duly elected and installed member, (2) "was" graduated may be correct, but so is "graduated," which is so commonly used in good writing that there is no reason to change it, (3) there was no indication in the Source of a "finding," (4) both "Davies urged that the city buy the land . . . to prevent" and "Davies urged the city to buy the land . . . to prevent" are both correct, but the former has the advantage of not placing two infinitives in a row, which could be jarring. GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:10, 3 January 2013 (UTC)