User talk:Ednan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Heraldry

Why did you revert all the copy edits made by Evadb? --EncycloPetey 22:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Ednan, I'm going to have to agree with Petey that the article should be reverted back to not including the Clackson quote. Generally, blogs and message boards are not appropriate references on Wikipedia. Mr Clackson is not a notable heraldist and the fact that he said something online somewhere does not make it something for the article. If that were the case, I could post on my blog saying "Heraldry does not exist," and then quote that on Wikipedia. I'm going to have to revert back your edits. I hope this makes sense.--Eva bd 22:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replies

You wrote: I think you are wrong to remove the Clackson quote, and indeed to have voted to delete the article about him. You will note that in the online reference I have, it was someone else quoting him (the editor of the "Baronage Press"). If you were familiar with the Scottish heraldry scene you would be aware of his notoriety. Wikipedia is an on-line encyclopadia and I would have expected it to have higher regard for on-line sources. Incidentally, I am sorry if I inadvertantly removed some other part of your edit. It was unintentional. Ednan 23:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

That's the beauty of Wikipedia. It doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what consensus the community comes to. Please don't assume things about me. I am a frequent reader of the various Scottish heraldry fora. I am also well aware that Dr Clackson is notorious among those circles. Unfortunately, notoriety and notability are not the same thing. You and I are looking at the same situation and disagree about whether it should be included. If you look back at other articles (such as the College of Dracology) you will see that we are on the same side of arguments. This just happens to be one place where we disagree. Finally, it is not that Wikipedia doesn't trust online sources, it is only that it tries to use reputable sources.--Eva bd 13:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

You also wrote: Incidentally, have you heard of Anthony Maxwell? He is another "celebrity" of the Scottish heraldry scene who I feel deserves mention on Wikipedia. However, dare I, in the current climate? Ednan 23:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I most certainly have heard of Mr Maxwell. I enjoy reading his Scottish heraldry pages. I'm not sure what climate you're talking about, but if you can assert that Mr Maxwell is notable (I'd probably disagree with you, again), then you ought to create an article using verifiable sources.--Eva bd 13:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

You then wrote: Incidentally, what would you regard as "notable". Aren't contemporary heraldry figures notable? Ednan 13:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely think that contemporary heraldic figures are notable. You'll notice mayn Wikipedia articles on subjects that are currently active in the heraldic world. Most of them are officers of arms, but some of them are academics and the like, such as D'Arcy Boulton, Michel Pastoureau, and Cecil Humphery-Smith. They are not heralds, but they are well-published heraldic scholars. That is a far cry from posting witty heraldic song lyrics on Anthony Maxwell's Scots Heraldry Blog. Perhaps if Dr Clackson wrote some articles for Coat of Arms or Double Tressure, more editors would be willing to accept his notability.--Eva bd 13:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)