User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 2

Speedy deletion nomination of NUDE SKINCAREHi Teapotgeorge,

Sorry for my late reply, I'm new to Wikipedia and am trying to put up a piece on Nude Skincare. On the 1st of October, you tagged the piece I put up to be be deleted. Please could you explain why and what I need to do to get this piece up. Ali Hewson is on Wikipedia and is linked to Nude Skincare, any help you can give I appreciate. Thanks for your time and help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph 270 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I tagged it because it had no references and was written in a promotional tone? I don't really recall. Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:50, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of John DeFriesPlease read comments in new articles before going ballistic and requesting deletion: how do you think articles get written? Thanks to the annoyance fo your notice I have now lost 2 paragraphs of actual content —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim bates (talk • contribs) 16:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sincere apologies...all good wishes Teapotgeorge^Talk 17:38, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changed items and undid items from the article issues box

Speedy deletion declined: Brian Calfano

Speedy declined Royal Norfolk and Suffolk Yacht Club

calm down

A3

Trout

There do seem to be some mentions on Google but not sure it deserves an article yet? Teapotgeorge^Talk 23:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We may need to be a community discussion on the matter. I just wanted you to know that by declining the CSD nomination, I wasn't giving an opinion on whether or not the article should exist. I was merely pointing out that it didn't meet the G3 criteria.  Frank  |  talk  23:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Bear (film)

Psichogios PublicationsI added reliable sources like TA NEA which is the largest Greek newspaper as well as some others. I also edited the profile because I was wrong...the company does not publish educational materials. I don't understand why you still put the "sources" tag on it again. Please let me know.

Thank you, (HarisHarossi (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I didn't add the sources tag, I added the notability tag and as you have a clear conflict of interest it is probably best to let others decide to remove maintenance templates. Teapotgeorge^Talk 17:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. I am not affiliated with that company. I just love their books and there was no page for them. If I was affiliated I would have known that they don't publish educational books, or that they don't sell through bookclubs :) I am new to wikipedia and in the beginning the article did not have any sources, but now I updated it and it should be ok.
Thank you for your message!
(HarisHarossi (talk) 17:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Issues you raised

Thanks and see you around.---Mariordo (talk) 04:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

International House of Prayer

The article has a general unencyclopedic promotional feel to it. The "Publications" section should go they are self published and therefore hardly notable. The "Similar Ministries" section fails verification or is unreferenced. "Popular Culture & Random" facts section is desperately unencyclopedic. The external links section is extensive and directory like Wikipedia is NOT a directory. The list of references appears random and not entirely relevant. Teapotgeorge^Talk 23:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree with most of the changes you made recently...I think it was a good job, but didn't fully understand the removal of the ministries of IHOP...I think that to be valuable information to a reader...I would personally be up for cutting it down..and condensing it...but believe think that the information is important and should remain in some form....Also I noticed some of the citations are messed up..i'll work on fixing those, i agree with the removal of some of them.....also you make reference to the site being promotional...but i would think that would mean removing information...many sites on wiki Examples: Simpsons, Bon Jovi, Dan Brown, Salvation Army, are filled with information but dont get flagged as promotional....is it because its a religious organization? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travisharger (talk • contribs) 02:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses unencyclopedic language which has been improved by one editor but reverted again by you. You have been asked to stand back and let others improve the article. The intricate ministry details can all be found on the IHOP website and seem out of place in an encyclopedia.Teapotgeorge^Talk 10:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've stated that i'm ok with changing wording..and i haven't interfered with that, but the article doesn't have to be limited to a few sentences to be encyclopedic....many people are searching for information about this organization and it should be found in this article, if Hannah Montana gets intricate details, i don't see why this article cant have basic information made public. You mention they can be found on their site, but [User talk:SuaveArt] had removed much information that isn't on their site. Also think that much of the Criticism Section should be left for users to find. Especially information about Mike's Association with the Kansas City Prophets. Why are other articles allowed to be filled with information yet this one has to be cut down to a couple lines? If its citations, wording, organization, neutrality that needs to be fixed we can talk about fixing that...but I dont see any reason that the majority of the information cant stay in some form.Travisharger 14:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see [1] You are welcome to add more details BUT it needs to be referenced to reliable third party sources NOT the IHOP website...and not in endless list format. Cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 15:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JetPhotos.net

In which case you will have no problems finding many reliable third-party publications for references. Cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 23:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Provided reference from Popular Mechanics magazine. However now you have added "Advertisement". Please could you offer guidance on where it looks like an advertisement and I will rewrite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noelmg (talk • contribs) 23:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The features section looks to me more like promotion of the website rather than neutral encyclopedic content but I may be wrong?Teapotgeorge^Talk 23:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I have removed the breakdown and provided a little less detail for this area - it is not intended as an advertisement. I have also modified the sister sites section to remove the link to railpictures.net as it is maybe not relevant to the article in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noelmg (talk • contribs) 23:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Onething conference

Replacing prod tags

My apologies but as her edit changed no other content in the article I didn't see it as contesting it, but simply removing a maintenance template. Cheers for the heads up. Teapotgeorge^Talk 17:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TeaPot, I am still getting the message that my Page is not Notable. Is it just a case of needing to add more secondary sourced information?Stephen0001--84.51.241.8 (talk) 14:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have added a list of sources but you haven't added anything more to the article? Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Teapot George, I am having a nightmare trying to set up the page for my company in the proper way. I must be terrible at this because I just can't wrap my head around the correct way to get the information I "know" into a way suitable for an encyclopedia! Please help.--Dbix15 (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)David[reply]

IT is strongly advised that you NOT write about your own company if it is really notable someone else will do it!Teapotgeorge^Talk 10:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teapot George, I am struggling to refernce the start of my page. Can you advise if as it currently stands is acceptable? - Stephen0001

Thanks TeapotGeorge for correcting the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torbjorn_Sassersson. Let me know if possible to take away the two warning texts on the page. I started a Talk page about the "TS page". Sassersson (talk) 08:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misstinkafairy (talk • contribs) 20:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE Colette Hume the article was a stub - the see also/ ref links were indication of notability while the stub was expanded. The article was inregards to a notable person (in this case Wales/ Education Correspondent for BBC News/ BBC Wales news) and seems to ahev been deleted soemwhat hastily before I had any oppurtunity to put a hang on tag into the page or argue the case for the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misstinkafairy (talk • contribs) 19:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Teapot George - this is regarding Concentrate Design page. I did re-add them as they disappeared and I thought i had done something wrong! Sorry to annoy you, it was a newbies error. I wont add them in again - promise. let me know if there is anything else i will be expelled for and i will fix! jemsta1979 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jemsta1979 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teapot George, yesterday I provided comments on my talk page in response to your comments from the past week. When could you get back to me? Best, Jemsta1979 ([[User talk:jemsta1979|talk] —Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC).

Teapotgeorge [Re New College Glasgow article]. Sorry, this was my first article. The information which I cut and pasted was not copywrite material. However I did not realise it was unacceptable to cut and past a paragraph from another website. It was my intention to use this as a starting point to edit and improve. I have now deleted all the cut and paste material and written it in my own words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wastededucation (talk • contribs) 12:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re FreakingNews article. I edited it to fit the neutrality policy. Removed all the "opinion parts", and left only the facts supported by the stated references. Would you please take a look at it now and tell whether you think it meets the neutrality policy, or suggest what further changes need to be done to comply. Thank you. Golunov (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

removed coi template article looks neutral now. Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re Philip Mould entry, I removed inaccurate information. What was written on the Wikipedia site was not correct. I understand your comments that I have a conflict of interest but at the same time I am in a position to know what is fact and what is fiction/gossip/untruth. Many thanks Emmahenderson (talk) 10:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Emma Henderson[reply]

Wikipedia relies on verifiable references though. Teapotgeorge^Talk 12:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Morley's Fried ChickenHi there, Just contesting your deletion of morley's fried chicken on grounds that is promotional - the article was meant as a Encyclopedic description of a company that has become something of a cultural phenomenon in South East London (see http://www.flickr.com/groups/morleys/ for what I mean.) I certainly have no vested interest in promoting the company - I'm just a South Londoner who finds it a curiosity worth recording. Thanks

Hello I nominated the article for deletion but it was deleted by User:StephenBuxton Cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 23:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding hyperlinksDear teapotgeorge

I have just received a message from you warning against vandalising pages by adding hyperlinks. I would just like to explain that I am new to wikipedia with little understanding of any guidelines. I am the press officer for Eastside Educational Trust, a children's charity and youth arts provider in London that works to introduce young people to the arts and offers free workshops in schools and at our base in East London. While the workshops on offer do provide young people with amazing opportunities, people do not always know what Eastside does. We are lucky to have a number of celebrity patrons who are listed on our website. I was simply ensuring where we are mentioned on their wikipedia pages, we are linked to our name so anyone interested in the charities their favourite celebrity supports could learn what that charity does.JVilkhu (talk) 16:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC) I did not realise this was vandalism in anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JVilkhu (talk • contribs) 16:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletionsHi TeaPotGeorge, I just wanted to say sorry for the two posts. they should be deleted immediately. I will work on writing new content so it is fitting with in guidlines.

thanks, so sorry for the trouble

Hz1234 (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bodmin Community Radio

Taipei Fine Arts MuseumInformation.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Taipei Fine Arts Museum do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. TeapotgeorgeTalk 12:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Dear Teapot,

You just elimminated for the second time all external links to the Taipei Biennial, the most important exhibition of the museum in question, as well as a link to a letter written by the local art community which asked for reform of the Taipei Biennial.

According to wikipedia "Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. These links are exempt from the links normally to be avoided"

To me it would appear essential that any claims would be backed up by verifiable sources, and that the reader should be able to see for himself what the subject(s) in question have to say; you just eliminated these. Could you kindly advise.

best Li Yue —Preceding unsigned comment added by Felix alias Li Yue (talk • contribs) 11:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Message for you

re The Quill

My apologies for incorrect wording, I did of course mean blocked not banned. Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the confirmation, I was afraid I might have prematurely closed out an SPI investigation or something. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gearslutz

Speedy deletion declined: The World's Healthiest Foods

Speedy deletion declined: George Mateljan

Glass and user Ebe123

Contingency

Reply

AFD

I am concerned that this is a quite subtle set of spam for the media corporation that supplies products with both these names. The creator of those articles seems to be wise to the ways if Wikipedia, understands the use of templates such as {{vandal}} though applies them imperfectly, and knows far too much about the way to conceal things to be anything other than a PR account. Sock or meat puppetry springs to mind, but the edit pattern gives no obvious clues. To me those two articles and the other edits made by this user lead me to suspect WP:COATRACK editing un a reasonably subtle form. The articles are clever because they purport to be real articles, but they appear to try to create notability for the terms instead of reporting the terms as notable and/or verifiable.

I am tempted to be bold and rip those (to me) spammy links out of the articles, or at least to flag them soehow as spam links, but I can't find the right template to do this. Any ideas? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! {{Spam link}} Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they have both been deleted already! cheersTeapotgeorge^Talk 15:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ryoji Ikeda ImageThe image of Ryoji Ikeda taken by Shervinafshar was removed as they do not have a licence to use or disseminate this image.

Formaartsandmedia (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you click on the image you will see that it IS licensed... "This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license."Teapotgeorge^Talk 17:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The person uploading the picture does not have permission to use the image, nor do they have the right to make it available via CC. We are pursuing the user directly in regards to this. Please do not re-upload this image.

Formaartsandmedia (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citations, notability have now been added to the Mark Boardman page from several users including links to the Locate tv site , references from the Guardian paper on Mark and also quotes from independant sites regarding the celebrity blogger / TV presenter & film journalist. I did edit the page for deletion to show the new facts, this is not vandaliam though simply making a case for it to stay from Melody —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.127.194 (talk) 18:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism you edited other peoples comments rather than making your own case and you removed the template from the article which was also vandalism. Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact me and keep the Mark Boardman page, it wsa marked for speedy deletion though I want to update it. Just search for me online. I have many links on wiki and now am looking to start my own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Celebritypresenter (talk • contribs) 17:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Teapot, please check out this page for the external links talk about MyFDB's links on here before you remove edits, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.113.130.2 (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... I just checked it out. Still looks like spamming to me and others obviously agree.Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In order to remove things you need to have reasoning, please point out WHY my links are against a piece of the External Links guidelines to justify this. There are plenty of admins out there that just remove things without doing any research as to why. That makes wikipedia less of itself and more of people with opinions with more power shutting down great information. I'm asking you to do you job here thoroughly.

I am not an "admin"...Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About editwarThanks your for bringing this to my attention, I have provided valid sources confirm what i wrote yet it was being deleted. I have also put the wording up for discussion on the talk page where others have suggested i use that word instead of another. Now that ive done that its being replaced even with the sources confirming.

Thank You Buffalo Buffaloxoldiar (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warThanks for your suggestions but you can put in "cultural icon" cause i fear if i do that right now i could be blocked even though i will provide valid sources, he seems to be deleting whatever you put even when its validated, if it wasnt thats understandable but it is as reuired by wikipedia.

Thx teapotgeorgeBuffaloxoldiar (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Early Wynn Salter

Julian Stair and Takesji Yasuda

Thank you for your concern, they are both clearly notable potters however, though the articles may be short. I've tagged one for references. cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:YoungDMusic

Aga Cookers

You have no "right" to a link for your own website! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum for advertising or self-promotion. Any editor who gives priority to outside interests may be subject to a conflict of interest. Adding material that appears to promote the interests or visibility of your own business or personal interests, places you in a conflict of interest.

If other editors suggest that your editing violates Wikipedia's standards, take that advice seriously and consider stepping back, reassessing your edits, and discussing your intentions on the article talk page.Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion about this at WP:EAR#Aga Twyford. Iannorman has also posted at the article talk page. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St. George's School, Harpenden

I think you are probably right and I have reverted myself cheers. Teapotgeorge^Talk 22:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Careful

Paul Wright (Cyclo-cross)

Hi there please can you remove 'clean up' advisors- subject is 100& genuine & links have been fixed or removed. thanks.

Elite Model Management

I think that certainly the list of countries could go...maybe the list of models needs it's own article? Teapotgeorge^Talk 15:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John BetjemanHi there, you recently removed my addition to the John Betjeman article regarding his last hours on earth. Just wondering why this was?

kind regards,

Maureen

You wrote "Shortly prior to his death, Betjeman kicked his wife, Lady Elizabeth Gazumer square in the nuts." which was plainly vandalism. Teapotgeorge^Talk 09:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Luke Wilkins

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Luke Wilkins. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Wilkins. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Well I certainly don't think you've been particluraly supportive. You've been extremely bullish in your comments, discouraging and unhelpful. As stated, I am genuinely trying to improve the page without coi or motive, but you're simply not giving me a chance - with anything. The comments that are left on the article page are no longer relevant as I have now removed about 80% of the article - I would still like to remove them as they now make no sense. I'm not sure I'll continue with editing at all if this is the encouragement I get, which I'm sure is not the intention of the site's existence. Have you considered that you could help me write/edit this article instead of unconstructively criticising it?

Buckston (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC) I also agree with this amazing person. I think that you could be much more constructive in your deletions. Please reply to me, and don't just delete this message and run away. Thank you. Blakey19962 (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grow up.Teapotgeorge^Talk 12:57, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth I think that Teapotgeorge has been very restrained in his handling of this. For example, on the issue of removing maintenance tags, he starts with a template saying "It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates..." Since Buckston had made an edit which did nothing except for removing a maintenance template this was really bending over backwards to be nice about it, giving the benefit of the doubt where some people might have thought there was no doubt. When Buckstone does exactly the same again does Teapotgeorge come down much more firmly, with accusations of vandalism? No, but instead we see a polite request not to remove such templates without resolving the issues. Similar remrks apply to Teapotgeorge's other contributions. If Buckstone thinks this is "extremely bullish" then I find it surprising. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional edit

Any objections to me undoing this? Buckston (talk) 17:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a link to http://apps.sepa.org.uk/Floodwarnings/default.aspx and 15 other external links in the body of the article! Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Didn't realise this was not good. I was just trying to make the page more interesting and relevant with links to specific areas. However, I can remove the links if it's causing too many problems. :-) Although it's still a work in progress, I was also asking for any other ways I can improve the article, if you have ideas? Buckston (talk) 22:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove excess external links

: I removed the following external links. Wikipedia is not a directory and the links don't appear to me to provide any more information about the articles subject. TeapotgeorgeTalk 13:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Scotland's Environment and Rural Services' (SEARS) web portal Animal Health website Cairngorms NP website Crofters Commission website Deer Commission Scotland website Forestry Commission Scotland website Loch Lomond and Trossachs NP website SGRPID website Scottish Natural Heritage website

I see. They are, in fact, all partners which form the SEARS family of agency partners which all serve to protect Scotland's environment. However, I can understand that some may not appear to be immediately relevant. Certainly I think that SEARS and Scottish Natural Heritage should stay? What do you think? Buckston (talk) 15:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 15:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ReferencingHi there, Can you tell me how I use the same reference number several times within an article's copy? Thanks Buckston (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it and it works great. Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the beginners guide. Really appreciating your help. Many thanks. Buckston (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your quicker than me I was just working it out!Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:-) I'm learning, slowly! I'm looking at re-sizing images too. Buckston (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stub re-assessment for importance and classHi there, Can you give me some advice about how I get the SEPA article re-assessed for various categories. I'm a bit confused about this whole area to be honest. Thanks. BTW - how's the article looking now? Any further comments?Buckston (talk) 11:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I know nothing about assessing articles. The article as it stands draws VERY heavily on one primary source namely the SEPA website and as such looks a bit too promotional/advert in content and as a SPA editor you might appear to have a conflict of interest.Teapotgeorge^Talk 12:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem about the stubs, thanks anyway. I've noted your comments about primary sources - I'll see what I can do about sourcing from elsewhere, although I had hoped that the references from newspapers, Scottish Government etc might have been diverse enough - perhaps just not enough of them though. That's not to say I'm disagreeing! Buckston (talk) 12:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ceramics

Ceramic engineering Teapotgeorge^Talk 11:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello & Thank you

NetRegsHi there, Oh dear, looks like we are at odds again, but I'm really trying to do things properly and appreciate you help. I've posted some reasoning behind the disambiguation page and you can see what I'm trying to achieve there. There is definately a distinction to be made there but I've perhaps not chosen the right way to classify it. Let me know how I could go about achieving the same but maybe using a different method. I also know that you use capitalisation ion your comments for emphasis but I promise that I am reading and understand what you are saying without shouting. :-) Sorry to be petty. Buckston (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deciding to disambiguate

Here is a disambiguation page... James it's for when you are searching a particular word and there is more than one article that it could refer to, as far as I understand it...you could ask at the help desk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Thanks for asking about the disambiguation page. I think I understand now. Quite difficult to get to grips with this but I'm persevering! Ok, i'll look up how to create a stub next I guess? This appears to be how it should be classified. I'll do my best to find the info for myself but any pointers you have in the meantime would be great. Thanks. Buckston (talk) 22:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just added the stub template to NetRegs for you. CheersTeapotgeorge^Talk 22:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the stub. Can you have a look at Floodline page too - I've suggested this should be a stub too. Is this corect and have I edited it correctly for this? I've tried to follow the approach for NetRegs. Thanks again for keeping a watchful eye and helping out with this. :-) Buckston (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

PS. But a quick google suggests that the article subject might just pass notability.--Technopat (talk) 13:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His old man... --Technopat (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just as well.--Technopat (talk) 17:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rockthesocks

Deletion tag on Misplaced Articles for Creation Submission Hi Theroadislong, according to the edit history you tagged a article , Rachel Pally, for deletion. This article was also tagged with:

{{AFC submission|||ts=dated and time|u=Username|ns=0}}

Articles tagged with this tag are Article for Creation submissions. If the article is in mainspace it should be moved to

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Articlename and the redirect should be tagged for deletion. The creator should then be informed of the move. The article tagged for deletion has been moved to the Article for Creation space and the deletion tag has been removed. Wikipedia may lose several misplaced submissions a month because they were misplaced and tagged for deletion for not being formatted or written correctly. Misplaced submissions are automatically tagged with with a misplaced Articles for Creation template. This template will appear at the top of the page. Before deleting articles please check for this template. Thank you. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Thompson House, Highland, NY

Please learn how to input the info correctly I will help you. Teapotgeorge^Talk 12:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The addition of the Thompson Library illustrates the importance of the family's contribution to the Hudson Valley as opposed to John Thompson's work in New York City. Please restore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenifergamber (talk • contribs) 13:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This should be added to the article about John Thompson (banker) then NOT the article about his house surely?Teapotgeorge^Talk 13:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It establishes the historical value of house to the Hudson Valley.

Would you help me upload a photograph of the house? I hold the copyright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenifergamber (talk • contribs) 13:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page will help [2] I can add it to the article as soon as you have uploaded it. Be sure to state the relevant license or it will be deleted. Teapotgeorge^Talk 13:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an autoconfirmed user yet, so do not have upload privileges —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenifergamber (talk • contribs) 13:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to have edited for more than 4 days... you are still not signing your posts with 4 tildes cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 13:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advice pleaseHi there,

Just wondered at what point the 'orphan' template could be removed from the NetRegs and Floodline pages? There are categories and pages now linked. Are there enough to justify removal now do you think? Thanks Buckston (talk) 13:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the orphan tag from NetRegs for you. The Floodline article is still an orphan with no pages linking to it? cheers Teapotgeorge^Talk 13:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I thought there were a few but I'll try to work on the suggested links to floodline. Buckston (talk) 00:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought my lasst one did. Jenifergamber (talk) 13:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deep Cut

But I don't wanna

Ok. Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HelpI hope this message finds its way. I have struggled with the layout in wikipedia and after a great deal of dead ends and useless help search results, I've found this page. Could you please tell me how to create references and/or tell me where I can find that kind of information? I had recently made some additions to the tea bag page and got shot down. I also want to know if the other user that edited me is correct that I should remove "junk" information?

Now I see that I'm going to have trouble signing this thing so I'll sign here in the body of the letter. -PiggPott —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiggPott (talk • contribs) 18:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help cont'd.

Saggar fired pottery

Ref Deep Cut press releeaseI'll acknowledge that the link provided is to a print publication, but searching around for supporting evidence is flushing out exactly the same wording from a great many sources, some attributed to Sherman Cymru, some not. That looks like a press release to me. The only other evidence that Revolution have the rights to the film is an eight month old reference to a director working with them on it.

Despite searching for any evidence of casting or resourcing of a film I'm not finding anything more recent than that.

I would prefer to caveat the point about Revolution having an option on the play given the limited evidence available.

ALR (talk) 13:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SEPA removal tagI did not post the chunks of text that are (correctly) due to be removed. Please remove the tag from my talk page or explain. Fenton Robb (talk) 13:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, I edited at different times, but all details were correct.What do you mean, I edited at different times, but all details were correct.

--86.129.250.236 (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are talking about the Sebastian Coe article where you changed Conservative party to Labour party. Looked like vandalism to me.Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Puis-je demander de quelle manière toutes les informations n'étaient pas correctes et précises articles qui ont été 'vandalisé'?

May I ask in what way all information was not correct and specific articles which were 'vandalised'?

--86.129.250.236 (talk) 19:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest you seem like a Conservative to me, am I right?.

86.129.250.236 (talk) 19:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't insult me!! ; ( Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, your not a Conservative then???

Well what do you expect me to say if you have a teapot (traditional Conservative) George (King's name) posh Conservative rich people.

You must be Labour then!!!

-- 86.129.250.236 (talk) 19:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this irony

Sorry I don't understand the question... I guess I'm up too early. Teapotgeorge^Talk 07:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're teapotgeorge and you reverted vandalism to teapot and warned the guy... HalfShadow 07:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

: ) Teapotgeorge^Talk 07:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome

Speedy deletion, GlocalProject, vandalism

They should provide an explanation in the edit summary though. Teapotgeorge^Talk 10:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up in WP:CSD and Template:Db-g11 and was unable to find a proof for it. I don't even know if it should be identified as vandalism, there is no reference to it in WP:VANDTYPES. Could you help me to understand this? Thanks! — Zhernovoi (talk)

David Leach speedy deletion nomination

Whoops! I reacted too quickly to the message left on my talk page. I'll strengthen the article later if no-one else is able to to do. Marshall46 (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do ; ) Teapotgeorge^Talk 18:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for quick response. Brilliant! Marshall46 (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Kanos Music

User:Benjamw

Thanks for the heads up though I deleted the links because they were poor quality not because of any coi. cheersTeapotgeorge^Talk 13:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:LCOC1962

Not sure what you mean by keeping an eye on it? They have recreated the article The Lincoln Club of Orange County three times now not sure how much more promotional it could be?Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tfchen

CoverItLive

Chemical Watch

That's fine by me. Teapotgeorge^Talk 11:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Theroadislong. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

11:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010Although one of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view, we would like to remind you not to undo other people's edits, as you did to the page Jewellery, without explaining why in an edit summary. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Jewellery, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. (Huey45 (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Theroadislong/Archive_2&oldid=1095001357"