Talk:William Romaine Newbold

Original creation

This page as presented is a mirror of the ones I created on the Voynich wikis and so is not a copyvio.Jackiespeel (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

True. The page as copy-pasted from an outside source was not a copyright violation because the source is licensed as CC-BY-SA 3.0. This is the reason that yesterday I declined the CSD G12 tag. However, note that the article as copied did not conform to Wikipedia Manual of Style for language and formatting and therefore required further editing. Which has been done twice now. What is the reason you have returned and copy-pasted the old version again? Please do not revert to the substandard non-MOS version without first discussing your reasons here. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am developing the Voynich wikis (among other things) and want other people to develop the biography as he has more than local significance. (The link to the commercial bibliographical site was for convenience - adapt as appropriate)

There is sufficient and sufficiently diverse information presented to have more than one paragraph to the text. Otherwise - a matter of personal preference in organising text so that the fruits of research can be added.

Feel free to move any original research to the VM article. Jackiespeel (talk) 10:39, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I've reworded the entry to place emphasis on Newbold -- since this is his biographical page. And also added a reference for the info mentioning Voynich and Manly because it was not confirmed in the UofPenn source. I'm sorry but I don't understand your comment "Feel free to move any original research to the VM article." What is your meaning there? — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

There is some discussion on WRN and his methods vis a vis the Voynich Manuscript; I was suggesting a place where such things could be considered without entangling with WP's OR restraints. (There are two aspects to be considered - the belief that Roger Bacon wrote the VM - probably based on the faulty syllogism: This is an old and odd manuscript; Roger Bacon was known as Dr Mirabilis; therefore the two are connected) and 'the method of creating the text' (whether micrography or 'an ordinary running hand (albeit incomprehensible)').

Would [1] be appropriate for this article? A list of works by him would be useful (there is probably something better than the one I suggested). Jackiespeel (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

It appears to be RS, having been published in Cryptologia Volume 19 Issue 1 -- so it seems appropriate for the Voynich manuscript page. I'm uncertain of its usefulness here in a biography of Newbold. Yes, expanding this article to include a section of Selected Works would be good, as would sections for his Early Life, Education, Career, etc. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 22:14, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Newbold's translations

'Mostly' disregarded - there are those who think there is some validity to his methods (eg [2]). Jackiespeel (talk) 16:54, 19 September 2013 (UTC)