PineappleDolly

Welcome!

Hi PineappleDolly! I noticed your contributions to Elmley Lovett and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Kleuske (talk) 11:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Helpful PineappleDolly (talk) 11:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Elmley Lovett

I appreciate the work done, but to my (non-involved) mind there's a couple of problems:

1. It's overly detailed. Information on who was the biggest landowner in the 14th century, for instance, are only of interest to local historians, not to the public at large.
2. It relies on primary sources (like the domesday book).

I would suggest you cut down on the detail and use secondary sources. Good luck. Kleuske (talk) 11:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Captions

Hello- You have added images to multiple articles recently, in which you include captions that contain more information than is called for by Wikipedia's manual of style. Please see MOS:CREDITS. Eric ^talk 03:03, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Very helpful. PineappleDolly (talk) 00:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Did you in fact understand my message? You are continuing a campaign of adding images with problematic captions. Eric ^talk 14:44, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. Doing my best. May have misunderstood your message.

With old photos it is helpful perhaps to put in the date and where the photographer is a recognised master to put in his name. I thought that complied. The Francis Frith images are from a collection entitled "Masterworks of Photography" in Germany. I linked to his page.

Perhaps you can help further. Not sure what is problematic there. Maybe leave out date?

All comment gratefully received. Thanks PineappleDolly (talk) 15:34, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Did you look at the style section I linked above? You could also post a question on the talkpage of that guideline to get some other opinions. At the moment there are a couple discussions there that might be relevant. You will likely encounter editors there with a broader understanding of the guidance than I have: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Captions. Eric ^talk 15:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for further message and links.

Yes I looked at the section indicated but thought attention was being drawn to the full copyright citation I had been putting in, which was cumbersome. In fact I went back and reedited some of these so as to let the detailed descriptions carry the burden of full attribution, and accordingly to reduce the caption content.

I will, of course, check out the section again and look through the extra information.

It is kind of you to spend time on this to bring my work to a better standard. PineappleDolly (talk) 18:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

See also

Please stop changing see also to Related articles and please stop spamming Empress Myeongseong everywhere. Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 10:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• I thought we were supposed to change "See also" to indicate content
• I thought we were supposed to create links for related subjects to other articles. This particular one spans a long period.

Apologies if I got it wrong. PineappleDolly (talk) 11:37, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

See also isn't supposed to be a list of every related article. It should be short and simple and clear as to why an article is listed there. If the article is already mentioned in the body, it shouldn't be added to see also. Have a look at MOS:SEEALSO (note it's called see also and not related articles). Masterhatch (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look at that. PineappleDolly (talk) 20:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)