User talk:Flags33

Michael Rush

Thank you for adding Michael Rush. Rush was my great-grandfather, and I was about to start a Wikipage about him, and found yours! I hope you don't mind if I do some layout fixes and editing and such. I also have a family photo of Rush, taken in his later years, which I shall add. Bluedawe 00:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I have now completed revising the Michael Rush page and am commencing research re Laycock for my next book. I would like to hear from Flags33, and ask what resources you possess (personally) re nineteenth-century Australian scullers like Laycock. I would like to discuss this topic with you.Bluedawe 22:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Elias C. Laycock

I'm going to have to sigificantly refactor the Elias C. Laycock article - although the text was based on a now public-domain book from 1880, it is still not particularly good Wikipedia practice to simply copy and paste material verbatim, for style and in this case neutrality and tone of writing reasons. Feel free to add content, but please try to avoid simply copying the book's text, and work towards WP practices such as the above-mentioned. Dl2000 (talk) 02:35, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Tom Sullivan

Hi Flags33,

I note your edits to the article on Tom Sullivan. I wanted to know whether you have found references to Sullivan actually receiving the title "Champion of New Zealand" from Charles Stephenson? I have done a lot of research on Tom Sullivan but nowhere can I find reference to him having won the professional title of New Zealand. My understanding is that Stephenson accepted the challenge by Sullivan, but that the extra side bet was to substitute the actual title being put up for grabs.

I also note that Stephenson is still acknowledged as "champion of New Zealand" in 1892 & 1893. This explains why Sullivan never defended his title.

Therefore I am proposing editing back Tom Sullivan's page to show that he wasnt officially professional champion sculler of New Zealand. Mgracee (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

NZ Champion, Sullivan etc

Thanks for your reply Flags33,

I certainly agree with most of what you said. Unfortunately I still do not believe that the title was ever up for challenge - for whatever reasons they agreed on. By 1891 Sullivan was certainly worthy of a challenge. He was the amateur champion of New Zealand (which is refered to ad infinitum) in 1890, had defeated Dutch and Stephenson. But nowhere can I find that the title of professional champion of New Zealand was attributed to Sullivan. He was certainly attributed the amatuer champion (yes the NZARA existed) and he was certainly attributed the professional champion of England (no professional body - but the Sportsman newspaper was the 'controlling body').

So I can only surmise that in the articles drawn up between the two men that the NZ championship title was not up for grabs. Perhaps Stephenson was happy to give the up and comer a 'big race' but was not willing to lose the title to him? Certainly in 1892/93 Stephenson was still being called the professional champion of New Zealand. And nowhere can I find a return challenge from Stephenson which Sullivan didnt honour (which yes, therefore would have been forfieted to Stephenson).

Please dont misundertand me. I would certainly like to attribute Sullivan with the title of professional champion of NZ, but I just dont think the title was up for grabs.Mgracee (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Canterbury Province

Thanks for adding significantly to Canterbury Province. Can you please state your sources as well? If you don't know how to format references, please start some communications about that on the article's talk page, and I'll show you the ropes. Schwede66 17:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Given that you did not provide sources, another edited has reverted your addition. You have now reverted the other editor, but given that it's still unsourced, I removed the content this time round. Provide sources or the content won't stay, it's that simple. Schwede66 09:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Nick Hanlon

Please leave well alone. The other website had copied from Wiki - not the other way around. So called super editors like you are a pain in the proverbal. If you wish then contribute to the Wiki but do not go around deleting things. OK.

For goodness sake. Ned Hanlan. The race listings were all verified and referenced. How about being useful and leaving things alone that you don't know any thing about. Is it any wonder that contributors loke me get pissed of with people loke you and want to give up on contributing anything to Wiki when it justs get cut by people who think they know more than the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flags33 (talk • contribs) 26 April 2013 (UTC)

If you believe you've been unfairly accused of copyright issues, the thing to do is explain that - not remove the template.

In this case, you would have had to do quite some convincing to make your case. It is highly unlikely that the Dictionary of Canadian Biography copied from you first because they are the Dictionary of Canadian Biography and second because they have been used as a reference in that article since 2007, several years before your edit. Beyond that, you carried over their indentation scheme, which breaks on Wikipedia and which you had to immediately fix because copy-pasting here does not always work well. You then set about making changes to the text that immediately transformed it away from that source.

If you want content to remain, don't copy-paste from your sources without following WP:C. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 10:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)