Talk:Robert Martinson

Thanks

After a bumpy start, I have to thank User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) for creating the original and identifying this person as someone of interest. Choor monster (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Ancestry.com is not RS

Unfortunately, ancestry.com is not RS. It is filled with user-generated content. See the essay Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#User-submitted contents which explains the problem. I'll be moving the parental information here. Choor monster (talk) 14:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Removed from the main article: "in Minneapolis, Minnesota to Magnus Constantine Martinson and Gwendolyn A. Gagnon". Choor monster (talk) 14:20, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Citations not needed

There is no requirement to cite sentence by sentence. In the two cases I deleted, the information can be verified in the next available footnote or footnote series.

If anyone would like copies of sources, please e-mail and I will forward you what I've got. (Note that your e-mail address gets exposed, be sure you've set your WP e-mail address to something exactly as revealing as you are comfortable with.) Choor monster (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Pointless

What makes linking to the office a candidate for running for "pointless"? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

It's not an article about the office. That would have a point, and I would not have reverted. You linked to a list of mayors.

The point of the link is to help a reader get more information of relevance to the article making the link. We don't link just because we can. A link to an article on the office would be of use saying what Martinson was trying to accomplish. In contrast, just knowing who actually won in 1959 doesn't tell a reader of the Martinson article anything of interest in regards to Martinson. Choor monster (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, I get your point. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Deductions from census is usually OR

I believe that making deductions from census information is generally considered OR. This isn't the same as making deductions from a birth/death/marriage certificates. You'll notice, for example, when I linked to SSDI, I linked to the broader list, not to the RM entry alone, since one always has to wonder which "Robert Martinson" one is looking at. See WP:FRANKENSTEIN for some classic name mixups. Choor monster (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

You always have to be careful with primary documents, and of course you can easily mix up two people in secondary sources just as easily. Just look at VIAF and how many people are duplicated and need to be merged, or are merged improperly, including Robert Martinson who is an example of both errors. He has two VIAF entries that need to be merged and he is listed as an author of a 1980 book on microprocessors in WorldCat. Look at how many birth dates have changed in Wikipedia since birth records and the draft registrations have been made available online. I changed and annotated two just yesterday. In the Robert Martinson case the documents are scanned and archived by his son who is in contact with me by email at Ancestry.com. He has all the documents linked to his father's profile at Ancestry: birth, marriage, death, divorce and a half dozen news articles, and maybe 6 photos. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I hope he doesn't offer the photos with a usable license. I think the mugshot is way too perfect! Choor monster (talk) 17:14, 10 September 2015 (UTC)