Talk:Elizabeth Maconchy

message: Apparently, user:Novaseminary got into an edit war with user:Ser Amantio di Nicolao in which the former wanted to remove most of the material in the article claiming it as "unsourced" and the latter wouldn't add any sources.
Please refer to the Oxford DNB biography as a good source.  No doubt.  To user:Novaseminary I say please don't remove material without checking the obvious sources yourself (and if you can't check them ask someone else to).  To user:Ser Amantio di Nicolao please check the obvious sources as well.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.166.116 (talk) 18:18, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What edit war? Anyways, please do not reinsert lots of poorly or unsourced material without properly sourcing it. Llike it or not, WP:BURDEN requires this. Thanks for the pointer: I hereby and heretofor ask 86.151.166.116 to check the source and add back facts referenced in it. Novaseminary (talk) 03:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Oxford DNB gives an extensive biography, (which you can read if you have a subscription, which usually just requires a UK library card), and contains the points references therein.  Please do not remove vast quantities of relevant material because you cannot be bothered to check the sources yourself.  What specifically is the problem ("most of it" isn't a satisfactory answer), thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.166.116 (talk) 10:39, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please add inline citations to RSs. Programme notes written by the subject's duaghter are not an RS. Novaseminary (talk) 21:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Quite clearly, you have not read the RELIABLE sources, despite being invited to.  All of this is in the RELIABLE sources.  What are you questioning?  I am not relying on "programme notes"; I am relying on the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.166.118 (talk) 22:31, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You reinserted sentences (referenced to program notes) including: "She moved to the country lived entirely outdoors and allegedly cured herself by will-power." I have reverted. Please do not reinsert again without consensus here. Please do add facts supported by an RS with a cite to the RS immediately following it. Novaseminary (talk) 23:48, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, is that the ONLY problem?  Then why delete most of the article and leave a few fragments?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.166.118 (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

text:  OK, so we have a new version with new sources (GOOD), but removing content, such as:
* Links to her husband William LeFanu
* Link to her daughter Nicola LeFanu
* There is also lots of other content that you REMOVED FOR NO REASON.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.166.118 (talk) 12:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Novaseminary unnecessary removal of material 

message: I've been collecting sources with a view to greatly expanding this article: 2 books, 2 or 3 liner booklets; several dozen articles on JSTOR (not all to be used); and about a dozen other web sites. Before starting (probably in a week or two) would anyone object if I move all the references into the References section to use list-defined references, and then reference them using Template:R? This unclutters the main text, making life much easier for future editors. I don't propose to change the citation style itself. --Stfg (talk) 15:27, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imminent expansion: references 

message: According to this article, "she is considered to be one of the finest composers Great Britain and Ireland have produced". By whom is she considered as such? This needs a citation. 2A00:23C7:2A33:EC01:8541:D0F7:30B8:74FB (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of the finest?