User talk:FranckLeprince
Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited Royal Artillery Mounted Band, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rheindahlen and George Collins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
September 2012[edit]
Hello, I'm McGeddon. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Peter Wyngarde without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. The removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 15:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- Dear McGeddon, I must apologize for only seeing your message today, 26th September 2022. It is quite a long time ago, but as I remember, I didn't actual remove content, but rather added to it. I may, in doing so, have rewritten a sentence or so, in order to make the added content make sense. If I did remove content without restoring it in some way, please forgive me. I don't remember ever removing content from any Wikipedia entry by anyone other than me, unless there is an obvious mistake (e.g. by changing a date, etc, or if new evidence shows a former belief to be unfounded) in which case, I would naturally explain why. FranckLeprince (talk) 10:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Please make an effort to improve this article, because right now it's what we call original research, and essentially an unsourced essay to boot. Articles like that tend to get deleted. Look at other articles to see how to add sources and annotate them. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a blog. You might want to head over to the Teahouse to see if someone can help you. And finally, please do not remove tags from articles. They are there to help bring them to the attention of other people that can assist. §FreeRangeFrog 05:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 14[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Artillery Band, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Irish Rebellion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 28[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Artillery Band, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Life Guards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:33, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Royal Artillery Band, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Life Guards (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Talkback[edit]
Message added 15:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
John of Reading (talk) 15:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Original research...[edit]
Franck, following on from §FreeRangeFrog's comments above, are you likely to be a position to clarify where the information in the military music articles comes from? Hchc2009 (talk) 12:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Royal Artillery Band[edit]
Good Evening
Why do you not like the infobox on the Royal Artillery Band article?
Every single artist/band/group on Wikipedia should have one which helps create a standard box which tells users a snapshot of information such as Country, Years active and the Official Website so the information can be found both easily and quickly.
Gavbadger (talk) 17:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Message left for you...[edit]
at Talk:Royal Artillery Mounted Band. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Replied at Help Desk[edit]
Hey, Mr. Leprince, I've replied to your question at the help desk, here. I'm sorry if it's not what you wanted to hear, but I do want to emphasize that I (and Wikipedia in general) really do appreciate your efforts to write these articles. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:23, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref>== Help you wanted ==
Hi,
I've noticed your request for help, and am willing to assist you. Firstly, please note that the opposite of "original research" is not "plagiarism". While you (or anyone) are not allowed to copy from copyright sources, you are allowed to summarise what they say, in your own words. You may find reading WP:OR, WP:RS and WP:V useful (though they can be wordy). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
Normally, "plagiarism" is not the term I would use as the opposite of "original research. I am merely making the point that this is how I am made to feel by the various comments submitted. To answer your question further, I am used to writing for various publications, and do not copy copyrighted material. I do however, choose to use information from copyright sources as part of my research, and my representation of such information is always based on what they say or a summarized version. In the case of this and all articles written by me for Wikipedia, my research is either entirely original - e.g. afforded by my own experience of servicing with the Royal Artillery Band & Orchestra, and other Royal Artillery Bands, and my unique position of having been able to officially search through documents and records of those various units, and other military archives where relevant. I have seen with my own eyes the various artifacts and possessions of these units, and happen to own my own copies of all of the books ever written specifically about the Royal Artillery Bands, and any other publications cited here. Throughout my twenty five years of service in the army, I have collected reports, programmes, anecdotes etc. and have added material from my own experiences, as gained through my own eyes and ears. I have pieced together, as well as I can, a complete potted history of what I consider to be the most important facts about the Royal Artillery Bands and the Royal Artillery Orchestra, because, except from the most recent of Henry George Farmer's books (The History Of The Royal Artillery Band), they are too brief for the purpose of a current encyclopedic entry. Even the latter publication falls far short, not in depth, but by virtue of it having been published in the 1950s. Occasionally I uncover evidence or alternative explanation of points previously accepted as fact, and therefore have to make an informed decision as to which version is correct. For this I conduct further research, and not until I am as certain as I can be (without travelling back through time myself) do I commit this to my article. An example of this being, my discovery that the Royal Artillery Mounted Band was based in Yorkshire during the Second World War (no records of this appear to be held by the Royal Artillery Band, or the Royal Regiment) but accounts by local people who lived there at the time, conclusive photographs sent to me, and further mention in press articles held in libraries in Yorkshire and Lancashire have persuaded me beyond all reasonable doubt, that I may add these findings to my Wikipedia articles with conviction and certainty that they are correct. In my experience of reading the most famous and revered of encyclopedias as found on the shelves in public libraries, they are largely written by experts in their various subjects. Compared to most Wikipedia articles I read, the Wikipedia ones are largely obvious summarizations of what the writers have taken from other publication. I see very few obvious clues that the authors might have personal experience of what they are writing about. This is not a criticism, but it does tell me that they are not necessarily experts in their own fields, but mainly collectors of facts as recorded by other writers. I am quite happy to read both types of article, but I must confess that I never see hugely pronounced labels and prominent banners across the pages of the well-established encyclopedias with remarks such as "This article includes insufficient inline citations" or "appears to show original research", which surely, to most ordinary readers merely serves to put them off - not the article they are reading, but - Wikipedia in general. Wikipedia is a good idea, but very far from being the perfect example of authority. Wikipedia could benefit from a lot of radical changes and improvements. But this is for the owners of this website to discover for themselves. I for one, do not regard Wikipedia as the ultimate encyclopedia, but it is the most convenient for the modern world. Its role of course is very different from standard encyclopedias because it allows anyone to update it, and is immediately 'updatable' when important new facts arise. It is not particularly user friendly, which is why I am replying to you on the same page as your message to me. I am also struggling to see how I may edit the title of my article, if this is at all possible. As there are various mentions in other articles of the "Royal Artillery Orchestra", but no actual article for readers to refer to it, I wish to add "...& Royal Artillery Orchestra" to the title of my article on the Royal Artillery Band.
Edit warring at Royal Artillery Band....[edit]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Hchc2009 (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]
Hello, FranckLeprince. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]
Hello, FranckLeprince. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]
Hello, FranckLeprince. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band moved to draftspace[edit]
An article you recently created, Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. Currently it's only citation is from YouTube, which is not a reliable source. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 TT me 12:40, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
| Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Concern regarding Draft:Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band[edit]
Hello, FranckLeprince. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band[edit]
Hello, FranckLeprince. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Royal Artillery Alanbrooke Band".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:41, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
The article Military and Processional music has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Redundant OR article. Subject already covered by Military band and Martial music.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ploni (talk) 16:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)