Lily Weed

Welcome!

Hi Lily Weed! I noticed your contributions to Thomas Knowlton and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, try the "Suggested edits" module top left on your homepage, or you can always find a task here:

Search the Task Center

Happy editing! Joyous! Noise! 18:27, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Sourcing?

I noticed that you've added quite a bit of material to the article Thomas Knowlton. Do you have sources that you can reference? It's VERY important that sourcing is included when new content is added. You can read more here. Joyous! Noise! 18:29, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

January 2026

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Thomas Knowlton did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

or in the visual editor:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Describe what you changed

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! lp0 on fire () 18:34, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Sourcing, pt 2

I'm asking again for some sort of sourcing to be included for all of the material you've added. Presumably, you learned about it SOMEWHERE. We just need that source so the material can be verified. Without that documentation, your edits may be reversed. Joyous! Noise! 19:05, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I've added as much citing as I can for the information I added! Thank you for the warning! Lily Weed (talk) 20:48, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anna Keyes Knowlton (February 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Bonadea were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Familysearch is not a reliable source, and cannot be used. There are also errors in the references, which have to be fixed (see the red error messages in the references section).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anna Keyes Knowlton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 16:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Lily Weed! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! bonadea contributions talk 16:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anna Keyes Knowlton (February 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by ChrysGalley were:

Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Wikipedia guidelines prohibit the use of LLMs to write articles from scratch. In addition, LLM-generated articles usually have multiple quality issues, to include:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing
  

Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This needs to be written in a much more neutral, encyclopedic voice by a human being. The tone here is akin to an advertisement. A lot of detail here is going well into the WP:NOR territory. What is required is a straightforward summary of secondary sources, using primary sources only to back up straightforward facts. There are also two sections of legacy, which is unnecessary.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit it after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Anna Keyes Knowlton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ChrysGalley (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Anna Keyes Knowlton (March 14)

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, SocDoneLeft, left the following feedback:

This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources.

• Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers.
• Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute.

Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed.

Your edits today greatly improved the article. The article still contains a lot of WP:Original Research. Example: "From 1776 through 1778, Anna is documented repeatedly settling debts, rates, and book accounts. Surviving receipts show her paying balances due to people like William Tiffany and Mary Bender." This cites two sources, both WP:PRIMARY listings of the documents themselves. If you can find secondary sources -- such as using the books cited -- the article would be much stronger.

Next steps

• Edit Draft:Anna Keyes Knowlton to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
• When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

• For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
• You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

• If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

SocDoneLeft (talk) 18:57, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for your response! I have put countless hours into researching her and reading her husband's book but all of them usually end with his death. There is no books solely on her and no websites that are accurate and most are just blogs on her that mess up on facts. Also, no other place except the documents I found on her mention her court dates or her hardships after Thomas died. Lily Weed (talk) 21:48, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

April 2026

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your recent edits to Thomas Knowlton when you modified the page, you introduced unknown parameters. Just because you specify |some_param=some_variable does not always mean that variable will display. The |some_param= must be defined in the template. You can look at the documentation for the template you are using but it is also helpful to use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and ensure that the values you have added are displaying correctly. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Note I have likely fixed the error by now so check the history of the page to see how it was fixed. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

But Thomas did only raise eight of their nine children, Lucinda was born after his death. Also, Daniel is a vital figure in his life, its better to mention him but they name Daniel Knowlton or Daniel Knolton (they spelled their names Knolton during their lifetime, most of it at least), kinda like how Katherine/Catherine Parr is actually Kathryn Parr because she spelled it that way. Also, Anna was a strong woman and she was about 7 months pregnant with Lucinda when Thomas died... Lily Weed (talk) 22:04, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Doesn't change the facts of my previous comment that |Siblings= is not a valid parameter... Also all of your claims are unsourced.... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:14, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Sources:

Daniel Knowlton (or Knolton) and Thomas enlisting together: You can find this in records...

Thomas Knowlton raising eight of his nine kids and Anna being about 7 months pregnant by the time of his death: You can look at the birth records of his children and his death... Lucinda was still born after his death... She was born on November 10th, 1776, he died September 16th, 1776...

Anna is never mentioned in books even though she was vital to preserving his legacy and she took care of a 400 acre farm, alone, spent most of the begining an end of her marriage alone, personally went to a Court of Probate on November 5th, 1776 (5 days from giving birth) to get her husband's property and possessions, paid all his debts and for things he lost (like that gun he lost during the American Revolution), her son, Sampson, died almost a year after Thomas died on September 10th, 1777, she also went to a Court of Probate on January 5th, 1779 to get her minor daughter, Abigail Knowlton, she went again on January 9th, 1779 to get her minor daughters Anna and Lucinda Knowlton, (and back then, children of female widows were given to male relatives or friends) her mother died in 1801, her youngest child, Lucinda, died on February 16th, 1805 and was childless and had no husband, and less than a month later, her father died... then she died on May 22nd, 1808 from natural causes AND SHE GETS NO CREDIT FOR DOING ANYTHING, ONLY THAT SHE WAS A 'GRIEVING WIDOW' AND SHE WASN'T EVEN A GRIEVING WIDOW!! Lily Weed (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

You are claiming sources exists... But not actually providing any... I'm not really interested in debating this further. Best of luck. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:24, 6 April 2026 (UTC)