Talk:Griffith Hughes

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Caribbean Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Griffith Hughes is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Griffith Hughes appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that it was the Rev. Griffith Hughes who first described "The Forbidden Fruit", although his book on Barbados has been called "a scientific fraud"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/April.

Wikipedia

prob[edit]

This page was loaded in error and should be still in User space see User:JamAKiska/Griffith Hughes (naturalist) for latest position 14:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back to this article that was written by User:JamAKiska - Well done! Victuallers (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation[edit]

The editor of that portion got the links correct in the main article. Suspect these were left as teaching point, as the links are VERY specific to these locations. CUoD (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, perhaps I overstepped and the links in the text border on OR, but I think they are valuable in showing where he travelled, but only if some disclaimer is given in a footnote. For the record, I'm 100% sure that Evansburg and Radnor are properly located by the links, 99% sure about the town in Lancaster County. I probably made a mistake earlier on "Lower Providence": Evansburg is in Lower Providence Township, Montgomery County. Nether Providence Township, Delaware County is also close, but there weren't any Welsh there that I can tell - so I just removed it. Newtown is a coin flip between 3 candidates. Please remove the links if you think I'm too close to OR. Smallbones (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your speculation generated a lot of hype (and if that helps fuel the motivation for high intensity research...great go with it; but ensure facts support your comments before you go publish, that being said, how would you feel about unsubstantiated comments like that about you?

You may be pleasantly surprised...Follow your Newtown link to Old St. Davids's Church and look at the list of rectors in the first half of 18th century.

His land purchase was in Berke county...how does this fit with these locations?

As for system performance, every disambiguous link detracts from the system. So while your intention was good to provide a learning experience, it is probably safe to say the newbies will learn this over time anyway. Another possibility would be to explain your point in the footnote (as you have done), and provide a link (for the newbies) to the page that explains the concept to help them become aware of this situation. Then you can remove or correct the disambiguous links and that will help everyone. Through enough experience, the newbies will adjust as required, as you and I have done.

I'll verify the other locations, and get back to you only if a change is required. Those that I've looked at so far seem spot on. Nicely done...CUoD (talk) 00:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link to a disambiguation page is no harder on resources really than linking to another page. If it's really impossible to determine now which Newtown is meant, to indicate taht you really emant to do it you should link to Newton, Pennsylvania (disambiguation) (creating a redirect from that title to the actual disambiguation page if necessary) as explained on teh talkpage of WildBot's operator.

...every disambiguous link detracts from the system, in that you have to link more times than if linking direct to the page of interest (saves time, no?).

If the Wildbot page has a good explanation for the newbie...go with it. CUoD (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest that linking to dab page is fine but your article might say something like "some say he lived in Newtown in Lespretendshire but it is unclear as to which Newton they mean" .... oh yes the preceding stuff is example only. Resources for text and links are negligible I think 15:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

That's better...I got carried away with those apostrophes :^). How do the land deals shape this story? Irresponsible, lack of resolve on his part, or far-sighted as he realized the depth of the commitment? The 2 tracts (405 acres - seems like a lot by today's standards) arranged for him by Hugh Hughes took place within a year of his arrival. CUoD (talk) 12:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm[edit]

I am unhappy that the front page of Wikipedia now says that this guy was considered a "scientific fraud" considering the absurdly weak sourcing we have for that claim. We reference a web page which cites an unnamed "American author" who said it. Not good.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 18:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome JW. The Welsh dictionary of Biography is a scholarly source. As it says it was "unkind". However other sources indicate that this guy did not write the book and there was a "ghost writer". The hook does not say he is a fraud, just that some have considered him as that". He did not spend very long in the country he was writing on. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 19:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Welsh dictionary may be scholarly, but it is secondary, and I would love it if we had a better source. What other source indicates that he did not write the book? That's what I'm saying: if sources do say that, it would be good to cover it.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't changed the article, but the hook seems like it is going in two parts anyway. I have changed the hook to "... that Rev. Griffith Hughes was the first to describe grapefruit, which he referred to as "The Forbidden Fruit"?" NW (Talk) 20:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the article may cover that ... as it grows, The article is only a "Start/C" as you'd expect from DYK entry. I haven't seen the source for the "Ghost writer" Ive only heard it as hearsay from the article's main author. We are using secondary sources. If we only had the primary source alone then we could not use it. As for changing the hook... why? If Jimbo wanted to throw his weight around he could edit it himself. We have changed the hook and left the article unchanged!!! That seems a bit superficial if we believe there is an error. Got to sleep now. Goodnight all Victuallers (talk) 22:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC) (As a smile on the side... is this a case of not believing a "Wales" encyclopedia? :-) )[reply]