Talk:Nicolo Giraud

message: Afterwards, one of Byron's Albanian servants, Vassily, claimed that Meryon diagnosed Giraud with internal injuries and early signs of septicaemia resulting from an anal rupture, an injury consistent with sexual abuse. Where did this come from ? There is no to this in the article. Wow Wikipedia is becoming a real gossip rag!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mykonosbiennale (talk • contribs) 21:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  sexual abuse 

message: So, fellow editors - where shall we start the discussion of the content?  I propose we look at the lead first, since there was a sentence in the long version (LV) that seemed to contradict the information later in the article.  In particular, can we agree that "probably in 1810" should be replaced by "1809", since that agrees with the sourced sentence in the body of the article? Risker (talk) 01:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well since this appears to be uncontroversial, I will proceed.  At the same time I will also correct the spelling of "favourite" in the quote.  Risker (talk) 15:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Rebooting to discuss content

message: This couple of sentences in Nicolo Giraud article baffled me "Fone also argues that the 1833 publication of the poem was prompted by the arrest of William Bankes, a homosexual friend of Byron, and the execution of Henry Nicholls for homosexual activity". But who are William Bankes and Henry Nicholls and could they be wikified to relevant pages in Wikipedia? If not , separate articles on both is in order. werldwayd (talk) 13:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  I've linked Bankes to his article; Nicholls doesn't have an article and I don't know whether he would pass the tests for one.  He gets a mention in this book and in this blog, though. BencherliteTalk 13:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: William Bankes and Henry Nicholls

message: In the first sentence, should it not be "possible" lover instead of "possibly" lover?  "Possibly" is not grammatically correct in its' usage with the preposition "to".  Also, because "possibly" is an adverb, and the intended use here is adjectival. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6:80:39C:7CA7:A642:8F4F:7605 (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. But I think what was missing was the indefinite article after "possibly", which I've now added.  Eric Corbett 17:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo?

message: A fixed some of the Harvard refs in the article, but there are a small number of other mismatches that I do not know how to fix:
#"Harv error: link from #CITEREFMoore1835 doesn't point to any citation" – Moore's book in the sources section is dated 1839. Are they one and the same?
#"Harv error: link from #CITEREFKnight1953 doesn't point to any citation" – it appears that no such source listed. Knight's book in the sources section is dated 1952
#"Harv error: link from #CITEREFMacDonald1986 doesn't point to any citation" and "Harv error: link from #CITEREFNeff2002 doesn't point to any citation" – publication date field has months and I don't know how to rename the ref. -- Ohc ¡digame! 03:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do.  Eric Corbett 14:16, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you ... you're a gem :)  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done now. I'll have a read through and see if there's anything that needs attention.  Eric Corbett 14:43, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harvard referencing errors