Talk:John Wildman

message: Can anyone say which place called Exton he was arrested at? Saga City 01:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the references list - James Waylen, A history, military and municipal, of the town (otherwise called the city) of Marlborough and more generally of the entire hundred of Selkley, Volume 1, London: J.R. Smith, 1854. http://books.google.com/books?id=mU2_n2vqkPkC&ots=Hx8dCbDXtd&pg=PA277#v=onepage&q&f=false I didn't footnote it because the original reference style of the article uses that more APA-like endnote style instead of autoreferences. Generally, you're supposed to pick one style and use it throughout, so you should either go with the flow or convert them all. Waylen quotes the original MSS, and the cited quotation I had in there originally was directly from it, although someone decided to take out that original primary source quotation and replace it with a speculation from a secondary (probably really tertiary) source. Tarchon (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: At the moment the article says "While the ODNB's identification of the first wife is merely questionable, it certainly errs in its suggestion that Lucy was the daughter of "Lord Lovelace". " This is OR, because Wikiepdia is not qualified to make such statements in the passive narrative voice, it needs to be made as an opinion of a reliable secondary sources. Much of the rest of the paragraph seems to be based on information extracted from self published sources which are considered unreliable sources on Wikipedia. I think we need to look at this further to see if the section can be reworded in such a way that it can be added as a footnote without sounding like OR and without being based on unreliable sources. -- PBS (talk) 05:43, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I have found the Berkshire History site to be very reliable and, as a local history, website, it provides information that is difficult to find in published works elsewhere or is just not available. It includes recent research, such as this, which is unlikely to be found in hard copy publishing, although I think the author has written a couple of works. After all people have been ignoring Richmond's research since 1933. Be this as it may, if you want hard copy references, I'm not sure what to do about the first marriage, but suppose the ODNB ref will do. For the second marriage I suggest that, in the family section, it is changed to Lucy daughter of Anthony Richmond with the Richmond reference only. If you read Richmond, it is very clear that he is correct. He cites his sources very clearly whereas the ODNB and Ashley do not. I think the marriage section is useful, but to avoid OR it probably needs rewording. Verica Atrebatum (talk) 11:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Marriage Issue (2011)

message: Why is Putney Projects, which came out on 30 December 1647 placed before the Case of the Army, the Putney Debates and Agreement of the People - it misleadingly suggests that Wildman wrote this before these preceding events/publications.  I have added the date to remove this confusion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.35.33 (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putney Projects in a Misleading Place