User talk:Elwesrobertgeoffrey

November 2023

Hello, I'm Panian513. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Miser, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Panian513 15:57, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope the legal references are helpful for the Court of Appeal and Leeds High Court and Grimsby Crown Court. The ISBN and book references I hope are added correctly. Could you kindly check it as law students asked me to publish the various Court Claim references references before the Supreme Court core bundle costs review. Thank you Again. If any references need more detail let me know. Elwesrobertgeoffrey (talk) 10:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have not the slightest idea how WP editing works and what you are trying to insert breaks any number of guidelines here. WP:RS requires you to provide a publicly available source, and that includes page numbers where you cite books so that the source can be confirmed. In addition, per WP:UNDUE the edit must be in proportion to the subject. The original John Elwes is only mentioned in passing in this article; a modern court case that does not seem to have been widely mentioned in the press is an egregious example of WP:OFFTOPIC. Finally, your username suggests that you have a family connection and such personal interest is deprecated by Wikipedia. If you persist, we can have your editing behaviour investigated by administrators. Sweetpool50 (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sooty I was just adding the public information to make the article have some contemporary references for law students. What do you suggest to edit down for contemporary Miser claim to give the article modern feeling and I as I was asked to add public Court listed sources by another Wikipedia controller I hope that helps. Sorry if I did something wrong offering the source material from Court files 2001:871:262:57C3:B094:7C94:7208:C7DF (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway and page reference on Court files are correct as claim numbers in public archives of Court of Appeal, Leeds High Court and Grimsby Crown Court. Book page number of Charles Dickens is ISBN and Book innCourt Files is ISBN of great great great grandchildren is correct. Feel free to edit it down as you wish as I am new abs just offering details of contemporary Miser Claim that is related to Miser listed 2001:871:262:57C3:B094:7C94:7208:C7DF (talk) 13:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have made no effort to answer the infringement of editing guidelines mentioned above. I am blanking your attempt to repeat your point on my talk page. The proper place to continue the discussion is on the talk page of the article in question. Sweetpool50 (talk) 00:05, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you as I a new to Wikipedia entries. I hope I have posted enough of the references and cites for you to maybe let the Contemporary Mister claim appear in Wikipedia as it is well documented and 6.5 million TV viewers might wish to know why the MISER Claim appeared after the TV Show showed an income swap well in excess of 1500 per week with one of 100 per week year the Court of Appeal showed in fact this income was not the reality rather the reverse due to Westminster Lawyer adopting the Scrooge or Dickens literary examples of what is a living and working income in the COURT OF APPEAL less than 100 unemployment benefit in testimonial fact not fiction. Best Wishes thought it might amuse your readers to have a real TV v Appeal Court facts from fiction MISER tale. Elwesrobertgeoffrey (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your user name seems to indicate that you have a close connection with this case and that you are merely trying to draw attention to yourself and family, which transgresses WP:SOAPBOX. This behaviour is strongly deprecated on Wikipedia and reporting it is likely to get your editing account WP:BLOCKed. Sweetpool50 (talk) 00:35, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was not trying to draw attention as I work in library in Austria. I hope you might be positive in maybe making suggestions for students to see MISER claim existed in 21st century. I certainly do not wish to draw attention to it but sometimes these historical occurrences happen to relate to pages on Wikipedia. I could edit it further if that helps you to see it was a real MISER CLAIM in COURT. Elwesrobertgeoffrey (talk) 01:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]