User talk:Collision-Shift

Hi there Collision-Shift. Thanks for the research and welcome to Wikipedia! I recommend that you be bold and make the necessary changes to the list of counts.

To make the changes there, go to Counts and Dukes of Angoulême and click "edit" (if you click the edit tab in the upper right corner of the screen, the whole page will be shown in the editing text box, and if you click on an edit link for a specific section, only that section will be shown.)

The items in the list look like this in edit mode: *[[Wulgrin I of Angoulême|Wulgrin I]] (866–886), where the asterisk is the bullet and the text inside the double square brackets is the link to the Wikipedia article (in this link, the "Wulgrin I of Angoulême" part is the actual title of the page, and the "Wulgrin I" after the pipe symbol is the text that's displayed instead of the actual page title).

So, just fix the errors and/or unclear bits you found, and add the sources you used on the same line after the years inside <ref></ref> tags; for example like this: *[[Wulgrin I of Angoulême|Wulgrin I]] (866–886) <ref>[http://www.google.com KFP's Historical Source Here]</ref>

If you used essentially the same sources for each count, you can just copy and paste the same citations for each list entry.

The footnotes will then automatically appear in the "Sources" section at the bottom of the article (there are already two non-inline sources in there now, one a website and the other a book).

To check if the edits are looking right, click the "Preview" button, and to save the changes for all to see, choose "Save" (and leave a little comment in the "Summary" field to describe what you're doing).

Also, if any of the counts' individual articles need changing, you can fix them in a similar fashion. If an article's title needs to be changed, let me know!

I hope this isn't too confusing, if you have any questions or need help with this, ask away on my talk page or the help desk or in the IRC channel! --KFP (contact | edits) 22:32, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, looks good! Let me know when/if page moves or such are needed (I see you're discussing the issue with Srnec). --KFP (contact | edits) 23:07, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Numbering of the counts of Angoulême[edit]

I suspect the numbering here is simply not standardised. Possibly the genealogy is not certain. FMG is a useful source, but I'm not sure it meets our requirement for a reliable source. I do know that all the reliable sources I just checked call this guy "William II", not "William IV". We cannot do original research, but must report the findings of reliable sources. I'm more than happy to help write more articles to clarify the confusion (of numbering), but we cannot decide that a figure known by the best sources as William II simply can't be called that. In the end, however, a move to William Taillefer II may be advisable. I'll look into this further when I have the time, since I seem to find two counts of Angoulême named William who preceded William II. Srnec (talk) 04:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow I'll show you what sources I'm talking about. But I do plan to look into this further, since I have on source that places a William as co-ruling Angoulême from 886. Srnec (talk) 05:40, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Conyers (disambiguation)[edit]

Thanks for spotting the problem with that redirect - but wouldn't it have taken only a few seconds longer to re-target it yourself rather than leave a note for someone else to sort it out? WP:SOFIXIT, as they say. PamD 09:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not out to "Win the Internet", just noticed an error, and easier to just "post-it" and let the originator(s) fix it, than change it and get into a spat with another user, history is the greatest teacher, and if we do not learn from the past, we are doomed to repeat it.Collision-Shift (talk) 17:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]