User talk:Charles01

 Slowking4 ♡Farmbrough's revenge 19:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you.  Regards  Charles01 (talk) 06:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * nice article. fyi, there is a w:template:cite ODNB which to me is easier than cite book.  Slowking4♡Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 18:21, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you.  I'll take a look at the ODNB template, though there's something to be said for sticking with templates that I can use without having to divert my brain onto ticklish matters like how an unfamiliar template works and which, if any, of my preferred fields it's liable to exclude!   Regards Charles01 (talk) 06:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

James Bennett (Tewkesbury)
nice article, i noticed you’re using cite web, rather than cite DNB. (and really https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:DNB which has the right verbiage) using that allows some categories keep track of usage. there is also wikiproject DNB and EB1911. cheers.  Slowking4♡RAN's revenge 04:07, 8 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for noticing.  I'm still miffed because the DNB calls Bennett a topographer and then doesn't say how.   At least ... I thought topography involved maps and mountains, but maybe I need to look it up and gain a "broader" view of the definition.   Because, of course, once he has been identified as a topographer by the DNB the label gathers wings and a life of its own, regardless of whether or not it makes any sense.   As someone (might have been Harold MacMillan) once said about dodgy media reports, a lie can be halfway round the world before the truth has packed its suitcase.  And if that was the case (sorry) in the 1960s, it is many times more so now.


 * Feel free to change the format of the citation I entered on wikipedia.  I am not particularly fluent in the language of wiki-programming, and if you find time to change the way I did it for the James Bennett entry I would probably find it easier to figure out and work through what you must be talking about here, than if you were simply to try and explain it to me as a theoretical thing.   The way I "do" wiki-citations is simply copied from other folks:  I claim no special insights into all the variations that one comes across.   My chief objection is to the way that half the online citations go to dead links or (which I regard as several times more evil) paywalls.   But i think that is probably outside the scope of what you are talking (ok, writing) about here.   Regards Charles01 (talk) 10:04, 8 January 2016 (UTC)


 * yeah, there are a forest of custom templates, which you can only find by trial and error. the english wikiproject DNB has some clues, and people doing as you. yes, there are errors in the "reliable source DNB" you can correct by looking at ODNB (if you have subscription, as my library) and then use cite ODNB. cheers.  Slowking4♡RAN's revenge  00:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)