User talk:Sir Stanley

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Sir Stanley, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Beve (talk) 18:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rush[edit]

Hi there! I noticed you're working on the Ian Rush article amongst other old Liverpool players. I'm glad to see you improving things as the Rush article especially left a lot to be desired. You should try to reference your sources. E.g. Say you read an article or a book about Rush winning the FA Cup etc, just quote the material like this:

<ref> "Book title or Newspaper article or Web address"</ref>

This helps back up your claims and stops any one adding false material as there is a source on which other editors can rely on. Happy editing. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 01:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous West Midlands links[edit]

Hi there!

I notice you've been contributing towards articles within the West Midlands area. Unfortunately, West Midlands just leads to a disambiguation page. Would you mind using West Midlands (county), West Midlands conurbation or West Midlands (region), and then using the "pipe trick" so that it appears as West Midlands where you want that effect?

Thanks a lot! Fingerpuppet (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sean Mercer[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Sean Mercer, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

WP:BLP1E: Subject not known outside the case - similarly, victim information is included in event article.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. [ cycle~ ] (talk), 00:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2007–08 in English football[edit]

Regarding your edit to 2007–08 in English football, the "Diary of the Season"/"Timeline of Events" approach is exactly what we should try to avoid and not really what Wikipedia is about. Articles should be prose-based where possible, supported by lists/tables (either within the article or as a separate page) where such information is better presented or summarised in that form. I've made quite a few edits to the article (albeit a while ago) to start moving it towards a narrative rather than a "1 January - X happened, 2 January - Y happened" approach, but you seem to be moving it back the other way. With your permission, I'd like to integrate all of the listed events into the prose, where relevant. --Jameboy (talk) 19:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jonathan Leigh[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jonathan Leigh, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Leigh. Thank you. Unscented (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Anthony Collin[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Anthony Collin, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Anthony Collin seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Anthony Collin, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anthony Collin[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Anthony Collin, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No evidence of meeting WP:ENTERTAINER

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Cheers, CP 23:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to I Love You Love Me Love has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Thingg ^⊕^⊗ 19:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Idea for new article[edit]

I see your new and enthusiastic and that some of your articles are being deleted. I suggest you create an article called 'Sport in Stoke-on-Trent'. Stoke could do with a history page too but I see your sport focussed. Your recent edit to the Sport on the Stoke-on-Trent article gives me faith in your ability to make a good article out of it! There are already articles on Sport in Leeds, London, Manchester and Sheffield if your looking for inspiration.--EchetusXe (talk) 02:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

Hello,

Please don't forget to cite your sources when adding material. I've removed your latest addtion to Oldham as it is a featured article and needs to satisfy the featured article criteria. I think some of the stuff about select, notable players is more suitable for the specific team pages too, rather than settlements IMO.

If you're unsure how to add references, then the page entitled Wikipedia:Citing sources is a good place to start. Adding references to your additions helps the encyclopedia and will save you from the disappointment of having your contributions reverted. Hope that helps, --Jza84 | Talk 23:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add in-line URL links on pages. Please use the appropriate template located here.--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are still adding in line URLs on pages, please refrain and use the advice given above jenuk1985 (talk) 23:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir Stanley

I have noted your editing skills and wondered whether you might consider improving the following article?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_palmes

Regards,

JC S — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jean-US-sg (talk • contribs) 12:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Samuel Irons[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Samuel Irons, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable. Famous as the son of Jeremy Irons (and through other family connections), but notability is not inherited; Only claim of notability in the article is a leading role in a single non-notable TV movie.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Baileypalblue (talk) 09:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Roads[edit]

Hello. I've noticed your additions to motorway articles and thought you might like to join WikiProject UK Roads, where you can find and discuss improvements to UK road articles. Thanks. Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 00:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. After looking through your edits I have a few comments to make. Firstly, some of your additions to the M40 need citations. Secondly, please read WP:CITE, a page explaining how to reference a source. Instead of just adding the URL to CBRD, cite it using the {{cite web}} template, this is explained here. For some reason, I think some of the information you added to the M40 history section is incorrect, it is not referenced yet.

I hope I'm not being too critical. These are good additions you are making. Keep it up! Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 00:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anelka[edit]

Hi Sir Stanley, just a message to let you know that I reverted your edits to the article. Regarding the Chelsea heading — it should have been part of "club career" but it should be done by adding to more equals signs (see here).

Concerning the lead reverts: With the lead section you should aim to be as concise as possible, including only the most important points and aspects of the article. In the Anelka lead many transfer amounts are noted but this is because they are substantial, record setting, or form a significant part of total transfer fee amount. A good example of a fully fledged lead is the featured article Thierry Henry. The lead also reflects the general size of the full article. Some topics can be summarised in fewer points; Xabi Alonso, for example. Despite the similar lengths in terms of article size, if you read the Henry lead you'll see that the crucial aspects Henry take longer to summarise than those of Alonso.

Hope this has helped you understand how to go about writing lead sections of articles. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have. Take care. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 00:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV in football articles[edit]

Please stop including POV material in articles about footballers. Wikipedia is not there to make subjective judgements about whether a player is a 'bargain' or not, as you have added to Kolo Toure and Mikael Silvestre, as it breaks Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Additionally, please do not add unfounded transfer speculation to articles, like you did with Richard Wright, as all claims must be capable of being properly cited. Thank you. Qwghlm (talk) 01:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Waterloo Road - Mika?[edit]

With regards to the edits you made to Mika Grainger, nothing has been revealed or even suggested that the character will be returning at any point during series 4. 92.11.25.99 (talk) 17:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Falmouth[edit]

Than ks for your additions to the Falmouth, Maenporth and Penryn article. Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 08:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Narnia[edit]

Hi -- I reverted several of your recent edits to various Narnia articles, mostly because the plot summaries are meant to be summaries, not blow-by-blow descriptions. Also, in several places the language of the additions needs more consideration. I'm not opposed to all of the detail you added, but I think a more judicious approach is warranted. Elphion (talk) 23:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Diary of the season"[edit]

Hi there. Kudos to you for chronicling each of Manchester United's early seasons under Alex Ferguson, but would it be possible for you to re-write these "diaries" in a more encyclopaedic fashion? Also, per WP:MOSDATE, could you please not link to individual dates in the future. Thanks. – Pee Jay 00:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Could you please take the above message into account? Your additions are making the Manchester United season articles look quite unprofessional. I would expect a response fairly soon. – Pee Jay 22:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between the two articles, however, as the year article lists events that would not otherwise be related, while the Man Utd season article covers events that are related. I suggest that you re-write the sections so that it tells a story of the season, not just a bullet-pointed list of events. – Pee Jay 16:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable sources[edit]

Please do not add unreliable sources such as Bernard O'Mahoney or Net Memroials or Celebrity Memorials these sources will be removed immedatly if added again or re-added. Please also use a standard template for the addition of new sources rather than simply dumping in URL links.--Lucy-marie (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it is the case that the sources are from newspapers then source the newspaper directly as opposed to Bernard O'Mahoney or any other tertiary source website.--13:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bert Bissell[edit]

The article Bert Bissell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

claims of notability are not backed up by 3rd party references

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 16:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bond movie appearances for car articles[edit]

Hi, I notice you've been adding/appending Appearances sections to some car articles for James Bond/007 films. While it could be argued (with some reliable sources) that some Bond movie appearances did contribute to the notability of a car (as they've tried promotion tie-ins in the recent ones), adding a plot summary suggests the interest is more in the movie than the car. It is best to avoid trivia sections in car articles, because people will be tempted to add every movie, TV show, music video, etc. they've seen the car in. --Vossanova ^o< 16:42, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Bailey[edit]

Please don't add unsourced information, or unsourced opinions, to any article, but particularly not to articles about living people, as you did to Dennis Bailey. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 09:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shearer[edit]

Hi, I see you added a lot of text to the shearer article, but no citations, is it in the citations that were already there or is it material from knowledge? Off2riorob (talk) 22:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne Clarke[edit]

Hello. You've been asked this before, but please don't add unsourced information to articles, particularly to those about living people, and don't expand sentences to include information not backed up by that sentence's existing cited source. If you're getting your information from a reliable published source, then please add references at the same time as you add your information; if you're not getting it from a reliable published source, then don't add it at all. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 09:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Economy of the United Kingdom references[edit]

Hi. While edits such as this one to Economy of the United Kingdom are appreciated, can I request that you try to provide references for all of the content you add? WP:VERIFY requires that readers be able to check Wikipedia content and so providing references to reliable sources would be much appreciated. It would also reduce the chance that your contributions will be reverted. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of living people, verifiability, no original research etc etc[edit]

Re Tony Cottee. Thank you for making a balanced expansion of this article, and adding some references this time. But Wikipedia guidelines require references for anything that looks like original research. Verifying the number of Cottee's goals each season doesn't justify opinions like "1991-92 was a frustrating season for Cottee" or "while the new look strikeforce was reasonably productive, the rest of the team struggled to match their standards" or facts like "manager Colin Harvey changed the formation to 4-3-3" or Everton "went top of the league on 21 October and stayed there until mid November". You didn't make all this up out of your own head, so please go back and add references to where you did get it from.

And in future, please stop putting square brackets round dates to make them go blue: we used to have to do that when you first started editing Wikipedia, but we're not supposed to any more; unless you're just doing it to be annoying, in which case ignore me and carry on. happy new year, Struway2 (talk) 18:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Sir Stanley! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,097 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Andrew MacLachlan - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 12:32, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tracey Bond[edit]

Nope you are right actually. I remember now, Blofeld looks out of the corner of his eye and Bunt rest the gun on his shoulder. Well spotted!! Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do You Not Remember Blofeld In Diamonds Are Forever?[edit]

I saw your edit about Blofeld, but it appears to be inaccurate. Remember, Diamonds Are Forever took place after On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Thoughout his appearence in Diamonds Are Forever, he was able to walk perfectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.119.172.206 (talk) 01:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC) Also, remember happened at the end of Diamonds Are Forever? Bond nearly killed him by crashing his submarine into the control room of the oil rig.173.119.172.206 (talk) 01:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to 1990 in the United Kingdom[edit]

In this edit [1] you accidently removed all the references, however I have restored them to the page. Tim! (talk) 18:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Middle Schools[edit]

Thanks for your contributions about closed middle schools on the UK page. Are you able to provide any references for the statements you have added? Tafkam (talk) 18:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair[edit]

Hi. I've reverted your most recent addition to Tony Blair because it's unreferenced political commentary, describing your view of the political context to events in Blair's life, but not actually providing biographical information about the subject of the article. Additions to the article are nearly always the subject of debate on the talk page. Maybe you could use the article's talk pages to find a consensus over whether a separate section of political context would be desirable? Alistair Stevenson (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 in the United Kingdom[edit]

Hi. I reverted you here because the edit seemed a bit POV to me. Also I think adding opinion polls is a bit of a waste of time as they change from day to day and are not always reflective of how an election will go. Think of 1992. TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once again please don't add Tory bias as you did here. Might I suggest you take a look at WP:NPOV for some guidelines on how to edit impartially. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting your edits[edit]

I am reverting multiple of your today edits, please discuss with me what the problems are before you make anymore similar edits, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 21:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References In Line[edit]

Stanley, you have been advised many times before about improper referencing. But you are still dumping URL links in-line with text, such as here in 2006_in_the_United_Kingdom. And these. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Which took you about 6 minutes, but will likely take other editors a lot longer to 'wikify' properly! It is not that hard to do it properly. To put <ref> </ref> at each end there is a selection in "Wiki Mark-up" below the "Save button". Please use it!. You have also been given links to the appropriate templates. All you the need to do then is fill in the 'blanks'. Much easier if the ref is done correctly at the time the text it refers to is added.
Remember, Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. Let's work together! Happy editing!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 09:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

You really need to keep your POV comments in check. Comments such as "5-1 demolition to neighbours City", "3-0 hammering by Aston Villa", "crushed 4-0 by Nottingham Forest" and "there were plenty of blunders" are completely inappropriate. – Pee Jay 21:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Footballers[edit]

Please stop adding meaningless speculation from The Sun to players pages. So many of these stories are created by the players themselves, and are heresay. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

This discussion partly surrounds an article you created. –xeno^talk 22:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you felt this article was an "attack page" or "negative unsourced BLP". I apologise if you think that it was one of these, but the article for Philip Smith (which has now been deleted) was about a real person who was indeed convicted of three high profile murders which attracted national media attention, and therefore I felt that the case was notable enough to merit a Wikipedia article. And I listed several sources for information that I included. I am very sorry if you believed that the article was fictional or contained false information. Sir Stanley, 17:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(moved back from my talk) I think you meant to leave this message for the deleting admin, see User_talk:PeterSymonds#FYI. –xeno^talk 16:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

Hi and thanks for your edits; just a note that we don't link dates per WP:MOSNUM. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: thank you for including a source with all of your additions, but please use proper wiki syntax to cite the source rather than just paste a bare link. This means enclosing the citation within <ref></ref> tags, and using templates such as {{cite web}} to include all relevant bibliographic information. Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Jeff Kenna, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 12:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my apologies for leaving the above warning. I completely misread the diff of your changes to Jeff Kenna and thought that you had added the unsourced description of his Birmingham goals. I realise now this wasn't the case. Again, sorry about that. Struway2 (talk) 13:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Format references properly please[edit]

Don't just dump a URL into an article. Use the <ref> and </ref> tags together with one of the {{citation}} templates. --Simple Bob (talk) 17:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use this method Sir Stanley, it is not so difficult when you do it a few times and becomes easy, formating a citation in this way allows readers the opportunity to see where the content is cited from and when and is very beneficial to the wikipedia readers and the wikipedia in general, as much so as the content that is added. regards Off2riorob (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<ref>{{cite web|url= add the url here|title= add the title here|publisher= add the publisher here|date= add the date the article was published here|accessdate= add the date you viewed the content here}}</ref>

Just to reiterate this about using references rather than just embedding bare URLs in the articles. This causes other editors to have to follow behind you and tidy-up providing other information such as title/publisher/publish date etc. As stated above, by other users, it is easy to do when you are adding the information as you have the detail to hand. Please do not irritate other users by continuing with this practice. Thanks Keith D (talk) 21:24, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It truly is annoying. Please format references properly and not just stick them in as external links. Alistair Stevenson (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am here again as there has been no change in your use of any form of detail on references apart from a bare a URL. How about a resolution for 2011 to give full details for all references supplied rather than just a bare URL. The work this causes others who follow after you is large and irritating. Keith D (talk) 22:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Emmerdale date of birth[edit]

Hi there; I just seen this edit - a number of Emmerdale articles have a "D.O.B." like that, usually placed by an anonymous editor. I'd be wary of their accuracy: very often, it's the actor's date of birth that has been given, so since it's almost always unsourced, and a possivle violation of WP:BLP, I tend to remove them, unless I can source them properly: in this case my Emmerdale book gives Zak's date of birth as 19 January 1952, so I've amended it, with a suitable ref. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gosforth, Cumbria[edit]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

wtf

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Gosforth, Cumbria, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Come on Sir Stanley, you have been around long enough to know better than to add this para about the Cumbria shootings without a proper inline reference! I have fixed it up a bit. You are hereby trouted and templated. PS. Nice edit summaries!

203.63.130.37 (talk) 06:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding text without references[edit]

Hello Sir Stanley. Just a quick note that if you continue to add swathes of text to various football articles then (a) at the very least expect it all to be tagged with {{cn}} (b) worse, removed entirely which is a complete waste of your time, and a waste of another editor's time who's tidying up after your unreferenced insertions. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Sun newspaper as sources for Liverpool Football Club[edit]

Please stop doing this.

Today you used another Sun link to misleadingly claim Kenny Dalglish has publicly declared he wants to be manager of Liverpool Football Club. The source contained no actual quotes from Dalglish.

Those who understand the history of Liverpool the city, Liverpool the football club and Kenny Dalglish will know he would not talk directly to the Sun.

http://www.contrast.org/hillsborough/boycott-the-sun.shtm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.165.204 (talk) 22:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "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) 18:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Sorry, but I've reverted two of your edits (this and this) due to them containing unsourced content on WP:BLPs. Please read WP:V and WP:NOR. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wulfrun Centre[edit]

The article Wulfrun Centre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The external links (in References section) do not refer to the text of the article, and none of them assert indicate notability. See WP:NOTE.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Peter Chastain (talk) 18:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010[edit]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Jon Stead. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. You MUST understand by now that misrepresenting bits of gossip off the internet as facts about living people, apart from being potentially libellous, is not what writing an encyclopedia is about. Jon Stead hasn't joined Bristol City. The snippet from The Sun that you "cited" doesn't say he's joined Bristol City. Please stop it. Struway2 (talk) 20:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Negative edits[edit]

I would be grateful if you would remove the negative edits you have appear to have made quite widely (for instance on Ramon Vega), which are essentially sourced to a journalist's collation of talk on 6-0-6. As such, they are not reliably sourced, and therefore in violation of our policy on living persons. In particular, I found the edit to Nigel Callaghan to be distasteful, given that he is currently battling against cancer. I've reverted that one; it would wrongly suggest that Aston Villa fans do not wish him well. Regards, --W F C-- 20:35, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, WFC is being particularly lenient here. You've been editing articles for a while, and have received plenty of advice on how to go about it within the remit of Wikipedia. The Callaghan edit is, at best, poorly timed and opinionated, and at worst, plainly offensive. Please stick to facts. Facts. Not opinion, not point-of-view, not commentary, facts. Facts alone. If you push any further POV or original research, I'll block you. Feel free to discuss it with me. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the matter is being dealt with, so I'll bow out of the discussion. For what it's worth I appreciate your reply on my talk page re Callaghan. I'm sure that particular instance was an oversight on your part, rather than intentional. Regards, --W F C-- 20:46, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so you've got the attention of two us for one reason. However, your continual additions, a lot which are unreferenced, which relate to opinionated commentary are still unacceptable. You are a valued and valuable contributor, but please, please ensure that whenever you add information, you add a reference (a reliable one!) to back it up. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Hey Sir S, per my note above, your contributions are valuable. What I'd really like to see is you using a {{cite}} template. What do you think about that? I always use the {{citeweb}} template for things like BBC refs talking about English football... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

Sir Stanley. As I've said before, you're a valued contributor, but please note the following:

This edit was reverted because your source didn't back up the information you added.
This edit was reverted because it was unsourced.
This edit is completely unsourced and will be reverted.
This edit reads more like a tabloid ("thin shadow of their former selves") and the source doesn't back up your claims.
This edit claims "often regarded... by fans" when actually you have a single source, a writer for the BBC's opinion.
This edit was reverted as the source didn't match your claim.
This edit is unsourced and will be reverted.
This edit is unsourced and will be reverted.

All these edits within three hours last night. You must realise that you're wasting a lot of your own time, and worse, wasting other editor's time clearing up after you. If you add anything, please make sure it is verifiable with reliable sources and neutral in tone, written in an encyclopedic fashion. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Many of your edits are not supported by the references you use, which is at best strange. Edits like this, in which the references does not mention either Wilson or Giggs, lead me to believe the worst. In this edit, less than 24 hours ago, you cited the statement "His parents had separated two years earlier" to this website which is nothing but a dead holding page as of now. I don't know if that website was working when you made the edit (nevermind whether it was a reliable source); given your history, I'd say unlikely, so what are your motivations? Why are you adding POV-ladden statements and then sourcing them to something completely irrelevant? Is this a purposeful campaign of misinformation or are you simply finding it hard to locate appropriate references so just use anything? From your talk page, you have been repeatedly told about this but seem to continue. I think you should take The Rambling Man's and others' comments as final warnings before formal sanctions and blocks are brought into place. Christopher Connor (talk) 16:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linking[edit]

Stanley, there are Labour parties, Conservative parties and Liberal parties around the world, so these pages are disambiguation pages. Please link to the correct articles by linking to Conservative Party (UK), Labour Party (UK) and Liberal Party (UK). Thank you. Ground Zero | t 01:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lord of the dance (parodies)[edit]

The article Lord of the dance (parodies) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

random collection of football chants based on Lord of the Dance - not really an encyclopaedia entry.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 12:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St Pauls Riot[edit]

I reverted your edit as it adds nothing of relevance to this article, perhaps suitable for a general article about English riots in the 1980s. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Community restrictions[edit]

The article Birmingham pub bombings, along with other articles relating to The Troubles, is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, as laid out during a previous Arbitration Enforcement case that closed in October 2007, and was amended by community consensus in October 2008. The current restrictions are:

All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions.
All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per day). When in doubt, assume it is related.
- Clear vandalism, or edits by anonymous IP editors, may be reverted without penalty
Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the guidelines laid out in the above link. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it on this talk page first.

The edit you made is a revert, and is also against the consensus on the article's talk page and at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-08-24 Birmingham pub bombings. O Fenian (talk) 15:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lord of the dance (parodies) for deletion[edit]

A discussion has begun about whether the article Lord of the dance (parodies), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lord of the dance (parodies) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. noq (talk) 20:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 in the United Kingdom[edit]

Hey, Sir Stanley, you still appear to be having some problems adding references to articles properly. They should have a url and title at least rather than just a bare link. Check out WP:CITE to learn more. Also, it's probably not a good idea to add speculative stuff about Prince William and Kate Middleton as nothing official is known about whether or not they will marry. Check out WP:CRYSTAL for further details on what to do about future events. Cheers and good luck. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning[edit]

Sir Stanley, I know that some of your contributions have been useful, but you only have to look at your recent contributions to realise that many of them are reverted as POV and worse, unsourced. If you do this any more I will block you. If, after the block expires, you continue to do so, I will block you for an extended period of time. If, after that, you continue to introduce information that doesn't meet WP:RS and WP:N, I will indefinitely block this account and all associated IPs. This is your final warning. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:45, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Sorry, but this edit describes someone as an alcoholic but uses a blog to do it. This is one step too far, and it's clear to me you've been warned sufficiently. I'm blocking you for a week and really urge you to read WP:CITE, WP:BLP, and WP:OR as a minimum before you edit again. If your recent, and disgusting article Lord of the dance (parodies) is a symptom of what you consider encyclopedic material, then you really need to make yourself aware of why we're all here. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stadium:MK[edit]

If you or your IP appear here again, please note that the only citation we have for the size of the proposed expansion of Stadium:mk is The Times which says 44,000. To change this to 55k without citation is a complete waste of time because it will keep being reverted. Furthermore, it is intolerable to change a cited text to say something that contradicts the source but leave the citation code as is, as if it supports your change. Please read WP:CITE. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia! Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, your recent edits to the The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe plot summary added a significant amount of unneeded detail and have been reverted. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You are welcome to use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tabloid gossip[edit]

Hello. You'e only just come off a block for adding unencyclopedic content. Please don't start adding yet more tabloid gossip to Wikipedia, like you did to Alan Curbishley and Martin O'Neill. This is an encyclopedia, not a gossip column. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 21:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Years[edit]

Please note the numerous entries you have been making to the Recent Years are local events better suited for the Year in the UK. As such I have been removing them. You may want to look at WP:RY for guidance when adding items to the article. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 15:40, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further warning[edit]

Sir Stanley, as you've been warned numerous times, you must absolutely reliably source all claims you add to articles, and you must refrain from adding gossip/speculation to biographies of living people per WP:BLP. Any repeats of this and you'll be blocked once again, but for considerably longer than a week. Please take a moment to refamiliarise yourself with WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CRYSTAL and WP:BLP. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

reverted in 4 minutes - please be more careful. You're not only wasting your own time, but you're wasting other editors' valuable time too. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

reverted. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and many thanks for finally acknowledging my comments. I'd suggest you read the rest of your own talkpage to get an idea as to what editors here are concerned about with your many unsourced changes to articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find it has become a part of my wikihours to spend them trawling through your recent edits, reverting and tidying up and the like. Please don't take everything in the sportspages as gospel. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of citation needed tags[edit]

Please don't remove citation needed tags without adding a relevant citation to a reliable published source, as you did at Frank Stapleton. In addition, please don't replace it with yet more unsourced information, as you also did at the same article. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 15:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genuine article...[edit]

Sir Stanley, while your contributions are sometimes useful, they are often not, and that's now unacceptable given the number of warnings you've received. Next time you add unsourced information, or information from sources which are not WP:RS or information that contravenes WP:BLP, I will block you again. A generous editor has suggested that a WP:RFC is started to discuss your behaviour on a more global scale, that would be preferable to an indefinite block I suppose, but it really depends on you. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Stanley, the "generous editor" has raised their concerns with me. You really, really need to start communicating - and not just through edit summaries (your edit summaries are great, by the way - no complaints there). But multiple editors have tried to raise their concerns with you, above. That doesn't seem to have worked at all. When communicating doesn't work, there are limited options left to admins like The Rambling Man and myself - normally we'd block editors indefinitely, with a promise to unblock once the problems were acknowledged. This is less than ideal, and it's clear that The Rambling Man doesn't wish to do this unless absolutely necessary. So please, please respond and let us know that you're reading the posts to your talkpage, that you understand what problems are being raised, and that you'll make an effort to avoid them in future. TFOWR 18:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't recall saying your edits weren't "genuine" (as you say) but I do recall saying that they often violated one or more of our policies and guidelines. And you definitely know that. So this is a final attempt to ask you to be more careful in future. If not, then your account will be blocked once again. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Selective is good. Using a {{cite web}} template is better. Ensuring what you're saying is definitely referenced by the source you're adding is absolutely essential. That way you won't find so many of your edits being reverted. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please read this comment from a concerned editor. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please check the url you just added. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Apologies, I should have checked whether it was accessible via Wikipedia (Sir Stanley) 15:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Please check the url you just added. This is getting serious now. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - And this one you added to Peter Beardsley. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - And this one you added to David Johnson. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:14, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - And this change seemed to introduce at least two more dead links, I haven't tried them all. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Problem with the URLs is because you're adding .htm to the end when it shouldn't be there. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Thankyou for the tip; I will bear this in mind with future links to articles. User:Sir Stanley, 16:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        You're welcome. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 15:24, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        It would be strongly advisable to just copy-and-paste the URL you use from a browser which is currently correctly displaying the page you wish to reference. That way, these kinds of mistakes should not occur. It would also be very useful if you could use the {{cite web}} template too, especially when you add content to featured articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Top tip for Sir Stanley: using {{cite web}} can seem daunting. My advice is to add references like this:
        
        <ref>[http://www.example.com/example.reference.html]</ref>
        
        ...and then use Reflinks to sort out {{cite web}}. Simply go to toolserver.org/~dispenser/view/Reflinks, click on the "Interactive" tab, and enter the article name in the "Page title or URL" box. Hit the "Run reflinks" button, and Reflinks will do the rest for you. It'll even convert several references at the same time. Off2riorob (talk) has used it with a lot of success, and I'm sure would be willing to help you if you ran into problems. I certainly would. TFOWR 15:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But please, please, please go back and correct the dead links you've already added. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you did this? The URL worked, the ref was okay (but needed to use the citation template), now you just have an in-line link which is highly undesirable. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Apologies, I wrongly believed that my addition to that article was one which had a link where the URL didn't work. Thankyou for pointing it out and correcting it. (Sir Stanley (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay, well mistakes are understandable, but we need to reduce the number you're making. I am certain you are dedicated to improving articles here but you need to do so accurately and in-line with our policies and guidelines, especially if you edit featured articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Please go back to using <ref>[ ... ]</ref> around the references you add so they appear in the References section of each article you edit. Then you can use Reflinks as TFOWR suggested above to fill them in. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nigel Lawson[edit]

Your recent edit to the article Nigel Lawson has been reverted because the claim was not supported by a reliable source for the content of your edit. Please add a reference to accompany your edits. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain verifiability on Wikipedia. Thanks Pointer1 (talk) 20:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Stanley, if I see one single edit of yours now justifiably reverted because you continually fail to use WP:RS then I will block your account. This is, absolutely, 100%, your last warning. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding references to this article to support your claims, but please try to add a title and footnotes (publisher, publication date, access date etc). Merely adding a URL within square brackets is not good enough, as this makes it difficult for readers to see where the reference has come from, where it is leading them to, and hampers authenticating the details therein. This also leaves more work for fellow editors to tidy up these shortcomings. I can see above on your User talk page that this has been pointed out to you on numerous occasions in the past so this is something that needs to be addressed immediately. Also when you add a reference, please leave a space before you start a new sentence so that the basic rules of punctuation are upheld. Other people are accessing these pages and information needs to be clear and concise. Thanks Pointer1 (talk) 01:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair[edit]

Your recent edit to the article Tony Blair has been reverted because the claim was not supported by a reliable source for the content of your edit. Although you have added a reference it did not supply the information which you made in your amendment and does not satisfy requirements. A verifiable reference is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain verifiability on Wikipedia. Also please note that a general election changes the overall political make-up of a parliament. That is how democracy works. A reduction in one party's majority over two elections in nine years is not a remarkable event. Thanks Pointer1 (talk) 00:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

cites[edit]

Hi Stanley. Just a comment, as I see it it is much better to add a single well cited comment that will likely stay in the wikipedia article for a long time, than to add ten poor comments poorly cited. I suggest talking that approach will help you. You could also try posting your desired addition to the talkpage first and getting some feedback that way.

With cites find the highest quality you can, eg, national large quality publication, make sure you summary addition is totally supported in the citation article content. Use this to cut and copy it to add cites, simply add the missing detail .. http address, article title, publisher and date of the article and the date you accessed it. For the dates I use eg, October 17, 2010 format

<ref>{{cite web|url=|title=|publisher=|date=|accessdate=}}</ref>

Off2riorob (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again[edit]

You've been adding "much needed" sections containing information on old Britons, using a website with no pedigree whatseover. These edits have been reverted. Please add information sourced only from reliable sources. You've been around long enough and should know much better by now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC) Examples of websites that need proof of reliability that you've used:[reply]

And when you add a reference to a page, please make sure it's got a references section with a {{reflist}} template, otherwise you end up with a nasty mess like you left at Blakenall Heath. I'm afraid continuing disruption, accidental or not, is going to result in you being blocked again. Please try to learn about reliable sources and how to best use them in our articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. Do you suggest that I only use newspaper reports or online news service reports when sourcing information as citation for edits? And if, for instance, I use a football club website to source results for notable games, do you suggest that I only use official websites? Sir Stanley (Sir Stanley) 19:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you stick, in the main, to BBC, Independent, Telegraph, ESPN etc, and written sources. Official club websites are usually okay too, as long as they're not being used in a way to promote a particular position the club wishes to adopt. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting centenarians[edit]

Here's a nice one I found in Greetham and I have centenarian twins to add to Stamford later today. Rich Farmbrough, 09:38, 19 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Proposed deletion of Friar Park, Wednesbury[edit]

The article Friar Park, Wednesbury has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Page obsolete as another article about the same area contains more information

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BakesAvfc (talk) 00:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shearer[edit]

Hi, the tweaked your addition out , that is a GA and please feel free to cite and replace, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Carrick[edit]

Please don't start adding tabloid speculation to articles again. This is an encyclopedia, not a gossip column. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits regarding Joanna Yeates murder case[edit]

Your edits to year articles regarding the Joanna Yeates case here and here are highly inappropriate. It is not necessary to record the detention and release of every suspect in the investigation, particularly when the first was released without charge. Therefore, I have reverted you. Remember Wikipedia is not a tabloid newspaper, and we shouldn't be castigating people just because they happen to have been suspects in a case. I urge you to read both the talk page of the Joanna Yeates article and that relating to Peter Tobin for some useful comments on how to deal with this subject. In fact, I highly recommend you read it. Furthermore, I will be mentioning your name at ANI if I come across anything similar in nature to this in future. TheRetroGuy (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

School numbering system[edit]

Hi again Sir Stanley. First of all, apologies for the other day. I was a bit too harsh on you. Just wondering if you have a reference for this which I am certain is incorrect. I left school in Summer 1990 and the new numbering system had already been introduced by then. I seem to recall it happened the previous September (1989), but I suppose it's possible my school was one of the first to adopt the system. Anyway, if you have a refeence that would be great. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Sian O'Callaghan[edit]

This article might interest you as it is linked to the murder of Melanie Hall.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using The Sun as a reference[edit]

As you've been told before, using The Sun as a reference (as you did here) should be avoided. Please take on board the advice other users offer you. TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Death of Sian O'Callaghan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Death of Sian O'Callaghan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Sian O'Callaghan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Paul Sixsmith, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Giant Snowman 12:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Northumbria Police manhunt[edit]

Hi, quick note to say I've reverted your last edit to this page. I don't think a link to the ex-girlfriend's supposed facebook page is meaningful; the other links were raw so I will rework them and put the relevant stuff back in on my next edit. Keristrasza (talk) 20:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wolverhampton[edit]

Another note to say I have undone your edit to this page =( Like many other British towns and cities with significant ethnic minority communities, Wolverhampton has a history of racial tension is an unreferenced generalisation. This was followed by a para about Powell and NF membership in Wolverhampton soaring - the supporting ref only mentioned Wolverhampton in passing, however. The next 3 paras were all irrelevant, too, not supporting your theory of racial tensions. Finally, please heed the numerous calls on this page above to add citations correctly, not just as a url. Keristrasza (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add my concern here. I'll block you again, straight away, if you continue to add unreferenced and POV generalisations to pages. I'll also warn you that using tabloid newspapers (e.g. The Sun) as reliable sources is not acceptable either. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou The Rambling Man. I now understand that The Sun newspaper in particular is not a reliable source as it has a history of inaccurate reports and some which are just about completely false; as one user pointed out it is particularly frowned upon to use The Sun newspaper as sources connected to Liverpool Football Club as the newspaper printed allegations about the club's fans in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster which were quickly proven to be wrong, and have resulted in widespread hatred of the newspaper among the club's fans and the people of Merseyside which is still strong more than 20 years later. Sir Stanley talk 22:03, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you add comments to articles relating to race riots, racial tension etc, you need to provide reliable sources to back them up as well. If you don't (a) the edits will be reverted and (b) continuing to do so will result in your account being indefinitely blocked. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can please clarify the exact types of media which should be generally regarded as acceptable sources for articles about high profile people or issues? (Sir Stanley (talk) 22:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although I see The Rambling Man undid your edit to Cardiff as I was about to, may I take a moment to suggest that using a neo-nazi site, as you did, to support your edits, is a little unwise? Keristrasza (talk) 21:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I did not realise that the website was set up by Neo Nazis, as I was generally searching Google for articles on the race riots of 1919 rather than searching for Neo Nazi organisations. (Sir Stanley (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: you need to use reliable sources. (The reason that "reliable sources" is blue is that it's a link to a page which will help you understand what is and what is not a source we should use here). The Rambling Man (talk) 21:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources (again)[edit]

Please stop adding information that isn't mentioned in your cited source, as you did at Wayne Clarke, Bryan Hamilton and Ian Rush. You can't just use a source that mentions Rush scoring 4 in a Merseyside derby to add stuff about Everton rebuilding their season under Kendall. Basically, if the information doesn't appear in your source, don't add it to an article. Struway2 (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I should have added another source to describe how Everton were starting to re-emerge as a threat to Liverpool at this time. User:Sir Stanley (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't just the Rush article.

At Gary Lineker, you used a sentence "Several years before, Walker had financed brief stays at the club by Ossie Ardiles and Steve Archibald, and then had failed to attract Gary Lineker to Lancashire" in Jack Walker's obituary, to justify the date Lineker agreed to sign for Grampus 8 and claim that was shortly after Blackburn tried to sign him.

At Bryan Hamilton, you used a source that said Hamilton had a goal disallowed in a cup semi-final, and went on to add "Hamilton and his fellow Evertonians did at least have the satisfaction of watching their cross city rivals lose the final 2-1 to Manchester United, a result which denied them the then-unique treble of the league title, European Cup and FA Cup". First, the source doesn't mention Man Utd or the cup final; second, you've made up the idea that it would have given the players any satisfaction to see Man Utd win the cup. Etc etc. Struway2 (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources (yet again)[edit]

Please make sure the sources you reference actually support the information you are adding. This article is very interesting, but nowhere do I see the information about Terry Sullivan, which you added here. If you read the Brian Regan article, you will see that there is a reference I added which does support (in part) the information. You've been on Wikipedia for some time. By now we shouldn't need to keep pointing these things out to you. TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Stanley. I don't know how many last chances you've been given, but if you continue to use poor sources, or sources poorly, I'll block your account again. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My statement that Brookside started on 2 November 1982 (15 days before Terry Sullivan's first appearance, the date of which had already been added by another user) is backed up in the source that I listed. Sir Stanley (Sir Stanley) 20:02, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But Terry Sullivan's first appearance isn't, and the article concerns Terry Sullivan rather than Brookside. I would suggest you look at the context of the sentence when adding a ref. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing on your car article references. I've modified your recent additions whenever the actual release date was written down, or deleted them when no date was mentioned. --Pc13 (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010-11 in English football article updates[edit]

Hello Sir S. Just wanted to let you know that I've removed most of the stuff you added to this particular article. We're really only interested in things like promotions, relegations, managerial changes, etc, and not speculation. So please keep to the "real" events, not just "A beat B and could push for playoffs" style reporting. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of new text[edit]

Hi Sir Stanley, please read through articles carefully before adding new text, to make sure that the text that you're adding doesn't duplicate what's already on the page. For example, the text that you added to the personal life section of Mick Hucknall was almost completely duplicated in the "politics and thilanthropy" section, and Noel Gallagher's attendance at the dinner was already mentioned in the "Post-Britpop years" section of his article before you went and plonked another mention of it in the personal life section. Also, please do not use bare URLs for citations; see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for more details about how to add refs properly. Graham87 06:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please also sign your messages with four tildes like this: "~~~~", which is much easier than copying and pasting a signature from somewhere else. I noticed this because you signed your message with a timestamp in British Summer Time rather than UTC. Graham87 03:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bare URLs[edit]

I see from other users' comments that you have already been told to desist using bare URLs, but thought I'd just provide another reminder. Bare URLs are extremely annoying, and it only takes a little bit more of your time to use the proper ref templates. But as I see you've been told this for quite a while and have still failed to fix the problem, I guess there's not really much else to say...

Anyway, here's a helpful link to a list of ref templates you should be using: Wikipedia:Bare URLs#Citation templates. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 20:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Soham murders[edit]

Please avoid adding bare URLs as citations. These are prone to WP:LINKROT. Please use citation templates.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing[edit]

You've been inserting text on medical subjects. Please be aware that such assertions have more stringent requirements for sourcing, as detailed at wp:MEDRS. People in the real world use WP as part of their search for understanding of what they are facing. We try hard to ensure that what they find is accurate. Your addition to Lung cancer leaves the impression that it is supported by the existing reference to that sentence (Harrison's). Please be careful. I've just undone several such edits from today at particularly high-profile articles. LeadSongDog come howl! 13:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011[edit]

The edits you are making to EastEnders related articles have nearly all been reverted, as they appear to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Mayhem Mario 17:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 2011[edit]

Football articles you're editing, the derby ones. REFERENCE the things you're adding. I mean it. I will indef block you next time I see you on my watch list. Problem is you add some good stuff but you MUST add a reference each time. Please, do me and you a favour and reference things. It's not difficult. You know how to press the "edit" button and the "save page" button, all you need to do is remember to add references before you save the page. If you find this difficult for some reason, get in touch with me as soon as possible. I'll help you. Just stop maxxing Wikipedia out with unreferenced stuff. Please. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	And, what's more, you do excellent edit summaries. bodnotbod (talk) 19:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More bare URLs[edit]

Hi Sir Stanley, I'm here to moan at you again. When you want to add references to articles, such as those you added to 2011 in the United Kingdom, please learn how to do it properly. I notice you've been editing since December 2008, so you should be familiar with how to do this by now, but in case you're not, I'm going to give you an example. Below is one of the references you added to the article, with the appropriate parameters filled in. Here goes;

<ref>{{cite news|url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14500869
|title= Riots: Arrest over death of Richard Bowes
|publisher= BBC
|work= BBC News
|date= 12 August 2011
|accessdate= 27 August 2011}}</ref>

This is the correct format, but if you don't want to add all of these parameters, you can simply use the url and title parameters, or even add it like this <ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14500869 Riots: Arrest over death of Richard Bowes]</ref> (using a url and a title without the parameters, which will make the reference appear like this; Riots: Arrest over death of Richard Bowes). On no account, however, should you be regularly adding them like this [8] as a bare url. This type of link is very problematic because if it becomes a dead link, there is often no other information to help find a replacement reference. I hope this information will prove helpful to you and if you have any problems give me a shout or ask another editor for help, and we'll be pleased to assist you. Good luck with your future editing. TheRetroGuy (talk) 15:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit. Please read the advice above and do not add bare URLs. Also, it is best to avoid The Sun as a source when there are better sources available.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 22:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Sir Stanley. Tonight's the night. If you continue to add text without references then I will block you. You've had plenty of warning. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the advice of the above section to stop adding bare URLs, (i.e. websites with www. etc) and add properly formatted references. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SOURCES[edit]

Please could you source the information you put into articles. - SchroCat (^ • @) 20:44, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And make sure the information you include is actually provided in the sources. --Pc13 (talk) 08:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And just stating the source in an edit comment doesn't count either. - X201 (talk) 08:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And don't just use anything as a source. Bestsellingcarsblog.com? Really? --Pc13 (talk) 00:34, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to help at Ely article improvements[edit]

As a previous editor of Ely, Cambridgeshire, you are cordially invited to assist in improving the Ely article at Ely article improvements --Senra (Talk) 15:13, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Automotive industry in Italy, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages FSO and Yugo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1988–89 Arsenal F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links to Alan Smith and Michael Thomas

Steve Walters (footballer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link to Rob Jones

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Blair Ministry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to 2000s

Marks & Spencer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to MetroCentre

Oxford (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Matt Elliott

Reading, Berkshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tommy Burns

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1986–87 Liverpool F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Barnes

Dougray Scott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jimmy Murphy

Nobby Stiles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to United

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final chance[edit]

Sir Stanley, I've just seen you editing the Murder of Milly Dowler article, claiming to tidy it up. Issues in the first few paragraphs of your recent edit (which I've reverted):

"43-year-old Levi Bellfield (three years into a life sentence for two other murders and an attempted murder) was found guilty of Dowler's murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, with a recommendation that he should never be released." is unreferenced.
" In 2011, within days of Bellfield being convicted of the murder, that News of the World reporters..." is not grammatically correct.
"her body dumped on the same day." the ref doesn't say that.
You removed "nor any of the possessions—the purse, rucksack or mobile telephone—she had with her at the time" which was adequately cited.
"(this was not made public at the time)" not cited.
" two days after the first anniversary of her disappearance" trivia, sensationalist, tabloidesque.

Honestly, this is the very last time I bother here. You edit as if you're a tabloid editor, and just use stuff from your mind or crap like the Star or the Mirror. You don't adequately cite things, and when you're dealing with really sensitive articles, like Milly Dowler's murder, you must know better. One more transgression and I'll block you. Seriously. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you don't use citations at all. I'll happily indefinitely block you if you persist in your edits. As I said, this is the last chance. Numerous generous editors have given you their time to try to help, try to assist in reference formats, try to suggest you stop using tabloid nonsense as reliable sources, try to suggest you stop adding gossip and tabloid gutter-trash rubbish to various articles. Any more and you'll need to take a long break and read all the advice. Sorry but you've had dozens of warnings, if you don't heed them, you only have yourself to blame. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you think adding things like "He is buried is buried in East Sheen Cemetery..." for Roy Kinnear (I can give multiple examples of your negligence) is adequate? Please preview what your write and cite everything you add to biographies per WP:BLP. No more transgressions please. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anfield Cemetery – you added "Numerous fans and a number of players and managers of both clubs have been buried or cremated there, including former Liverpool manager Bill Shankly in October 1981" - where is that referenced? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Robbie Coltrane – this edit was rapidly reverted as POV and unsourced.
Soham murders – "the latter charge had been left on file and was present on the national police computer" did you cite that explicitly? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Taylor Report – this needs reference, obviously.
Roy Kinnear – remove the repeated "is buried" and be more careful not add errors like this in the future.
1976–77 Liverpool F.C. season – where's the citation for this edit?
Liverpool F.C. – this has been reverted for similar reasons...
Any reason why you can't format this link in the way you've been asked many, many times?
David de Gea – you add no references for his transfer fee nor his "non-appearances" for Spain.

Please learn how to use references properly, you've been told so many times how to do it. If you need more help, please let me know. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, despite your valedictory, I warned you back in August last year, providing you a list of issues you failed to address, as you well know. That's why this really is your final warning. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:40, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back. I've added {{No footnotes}} to the 1986 FA Cup Final article as it's just using external links, not citations. Before you re-add your claim, please address the referencing issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited 1985 Handsworth riots, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Handsworth (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Early 1990s recession (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Handsworth

Vinnie Jones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Stamford Bridge

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited 1993–94 Football League Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hillsborough (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reflinks tool[edit]

Hi, noticing you still have difficulty with adding references, I wondered whether you'd seen our Reflinks tool for adding parameters to sources. It's quick and easy to operate and saves a lot of time and hassle if it's something that does cause you problems. Paul MacDermott (talk) 21:23, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

George Best (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Las Vegas

Niall Quinn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to George Graham

Tipton Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Oldbury

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 4[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Steve McMahon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Ball (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 13[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited 1991–92 Liverpool F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Thomas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 20[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1940 in the United Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Small Heath

A4123 road (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Oldbury

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 5[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hillman Avenger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Linwood

Hillsborough disaster (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mark Womack

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Richard Forsyth, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 07:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 12[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Capital punishment in the United Kingdom, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages West London and IRA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 23[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2005 in the United Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cracker

List of large council estates in the UK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Oldbury

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding references[edit]

Hi Sir Stanley. I've looked at many of your recent contributions which I'm glad to see are positive and are referenced. If possible you could use a {{citation}} template like {{cite web}}. That way, the refs you add are really useful! Please leave me a message at my talk page if you're interested. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again. I know you speak and understand English so why don't you communicate with the rest of us when we ask you to use references properly? Please? PLEASE? Stop using raw URLS (i.e. http://www.examplepage.com/sirstanley.html) and instead use one of the templates I've referred you to above. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted[edit]

Hi. I have reverted your edit to List of prisoners with whole-life tariffs. Roy Whiting's minimum tariff was set at 40 years in June 2010. John Taylor's tariff was set at 20 years. Timothy Morss is awaiting a High Court hearing - probably to be heard this year - for his minimum tariff to be determined. Keristrasza (talk) 20:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sporting Heroes[edit]

Please don't assume that SportingHeroes.com is more accurate than sources already present in articles. You "corrected" the date of Arthur Albiston's Scotland debut, when Mr Albiston's Scottish FA profile, linked from the article, confirmed the date "before" your change. See Scottish FA profile. Confirmed by RSSSF. Struway2 (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning[edit]

Please stop adding tabloid-style speculation to articles. This is an encyclopaedia, not a collection of rumours. Secondly, if you wish to add references (which is encouraged, from reliable sources) then ensure they are formatted properly as to avoid link rot. If you do not follow this advice, I will block your account. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continually adding speculation and tabloid rubbish to articles despite multiple requests, and avoiding use of proper citation templates. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sir Stanley (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

A ban is a harsh consequence for this mistake; especially as I have been choosier about my sources since concerns were voiced on here a year or so ago after I used The Sun newspaper as a source - particularly on articles relating to Liverpool FC. But I feel that a 14-day ban is manifestly excessive, especially as no sensitive subjects were involved in any of my edits.

Decline reason:

I see that you were warned multiple times that it was important to learn how to identify reliable sources and how to format citations correctly. The most recent warning clearly states that you will be blocked if you don't take time to master those skills. After that warning, I see this edit, in which you cite a source which does not meet Wikipedia's reliable sources criteria, and format it incorrectly. It appears that you had a clear understanding that a block would follow if you did that, and you chose to do it anyway- I do not see grounds to overturn this block. If the warnings of multiple people were not enough to persuade you to stop adding poorly-sourced information, a block is the only way to get the edits to stop. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Disambiguation link notification for July 13[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited 1990–91 Manchester United F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heysel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

old firm matches[edit]

i was goign to revert your addtion but it correct however thre is plenty of sources saying they plan to bring back the glasgow cup for two reason firstly to garantee some old firm matches per season as broadcasters want it, and secondly it will help with league reconstruction of the spl if they decide to increase the number of the teams and make each tema play each other twice so the broadcasters still have 4 old firms matches a season, you might want to change the wording a littleAndrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 18:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ann West[edit]

The article Ann West has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Ann West is known for only one event, the murder of her son, which is already covered in the Moors murders article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Malleus Fatuorum 18:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited 2006 in British television, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Johnny Briggs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ann West for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ann West is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann West until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Malleus Fatuorum 15:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Raintheone. I noticed that you made a change to an article, William Boyde, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Rain the 1 22:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1932 in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East London (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1993–94 Nottingham Forest F.C. season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Phillips (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding info[edit]

Hi, when you're adding info to articles such as here could you provide references and write in an encyclopaedic tone. Unreferenced material should not be added to articles, especially when there is a tag stating the article needs citations. The prose should not be journalistic in tone either, see here. You've been here long enough to know this, so it shouldn't have to be pointed out to you. NapHit (talk) 21:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1956–57 in English football, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The double (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 in the United Kingdom[edit]

Just responding to your edit here. Much as the BBC is thought of as being a reliable source, I think in this situation they are probably not the best source to use, particularly since they've admitted themselves their account of certain events is inaccurate. I know there are some news outlets who are regarded as being anti-BBC, but there are others who are more neutral. Generally I'd say references such as The Independent, RTE and The Guardian are safe bets. Paul MacDermott (talk) 10:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1983–84 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to George Smith, Ken Armstrong and Arthur Chandler

1985–86 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to West London

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1989–90 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to George Hannah

1990–91 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bill Curry (footballer)

List of prisoners with whole-life tariffs (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Harry Roberts

Matt Busby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Battle of Arras

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1997–98 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Newport County

Manchester derby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Bond

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2003–04 in English football (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ted Bates

Lee Sharpe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The double

Sedgley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to West Midlands

Tipton Municipal Borough (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Oldbury

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1989–90 Luton Town F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jim Ryan

1990–91 Luton Town F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jim Ryan

1991–92 Luton Town F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jim Ryan

1991–92 Oldham Athletic A.F.C. season (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mike Milligan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bobby Charlton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to United States of America national football team

Mark Hateley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Graham Taylor

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Footballers' England career details[edit]

Hello. I noticed you've recently been adding England career details to a number of footballers. Unfortunately, the bare link you added as a "reference" just points to a list of England players. Even clicking on a player's name in that list, e.g. Mark Hateley, takes the reader to a page that doesn't verify information like his earning "a surprise recall" to the England squad in 1992. Please go back and fix those links to point to the relevant player page, ideally format them properly, and please remove any personal opinions that aren't backed up by the page you link to. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 12:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1964–65 in English football, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The double (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1964 in Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Sheridan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative accounts[edit]

Hello Sir Stanley. I will ask this of you only once, have you used one or more other registered accounts while you have been editing Wikipedia for the past 6 or so years? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have no need to answer this question, or any other related to your time on Wikipedia. Rambling Man is only looking to start trouble with you. Getting (talk) 16:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Stanley already replied. You're stalking my edits now, Getting? Good luck with that! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message from another stalker: The Rambling Man was out of line in asking this question, and Sir Stanley (or any other user) would be under no obligation to reply to this type of fishing expedition on a talk page. Either there is worthwhile evidence of sockpuppetry, or there is not.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there was no obligation for him to answer the question. But thanks so much for your valuable input to the discussion. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rambling man has also attempted to blackmail me into apologising for a non comment, and threatened to block me in punishment, clearly violating both wp:involved and the policies surrounding the use of blocking tools. He also seems to think I have accused him of misusing his administrative tools, as per edit to his talkpage. There is something very, very worrying about his behaviour when you consider he has both sysop and 'crat tools. I will be watching the situation very carefully, and I am prepared to work with Sir Stanley if he wishes to take you to any of the drama boards. Getting (talk) 18:50, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Funniest thing I've read today. Thanks again for stalking my edits, no reason at all you'd be here given your "100 or so" edits, but there you go. It would be best if you stopped shopping, just because you've been advised to stop editing at various other talk pages, Sir Stanley shouldn't be your proxy talk page. There's no blackmail, and I never said I'd block you myself (per all your "involved" nonsense).... just a reminder (and a pointer to the policy) that personal attacks (such as "you really are an acidic little man") would eventually result in being blocked. I've left you a space on my talkpage just to stop this very thing, abusing other editors' own talkpages. As I said, bring your opinions there. I'm so glad you'll be watching "the situation" so carefully. That really reassures me, and I'm sure it reassures the community. Well done. Incidentally, I can't be bothered waiting for you to enact some kind of "admin abuse" or "crat abuse" incident, I have numerous things to be getting on with, so please, when you start these actions, leave me a message. In the meantime, I'll just continue with improving articles, reviewing articles etc, which I'm sure is something you may wish to look into doing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1958–59 in English football, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Billy Wright (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nanjing Automobile, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abingdon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1942 in Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Birkenau (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited County Borough of Dudley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oldbury (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

1958 in Wales (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jimmy Murphy

1961 in Northern Ireland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The double

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for 1959–60 in English football[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, 1959–60 in English football, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 22:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited B postcode area, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Langley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Please format references correctly as you have been asked many, many, many times to avoid linkrot. Also please do not destroy links that are already correctly formatted as you did in the Milly Dowler article. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning, stop adding linkrot and poorly referenced claims and poorly formatted references to articles as you have recently tried to do at Jill Dando and Murder of Milly Dowler. You have had multiple warnings and blocks for this. If you need help, then ask, otherwise continuing to do so will result in an indefinite block on this account. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Click on this link to see how to change your linkrot into a useful citation. If you continue to add speculation, linkrot, poor quality sources etc, this will have to end. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The 11 O'Clock Show, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bobby Black (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 21:31, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

I see you have unretired. In that case, please take some time to understand how to correctly add references to articles to prevent linkrot from occurring. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and by "trivial", do you mean being asked to comply with Wikipedia policies like WP:V? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 in the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Moore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Steve Money[edit]

The article Steve Money has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources, no significant coverage found. No major roles.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Michig (talk) 11:19, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First school[edit]

Hi ~~Stanly~~Stanley:

Disregard the edit summary here, I don't mean it as a snipe at you:

[9],

but I thought I'd show you a better way of writing so the reader can understand what you are talking about.174.3.125.23 (talk) 06:34, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for helping the article expand!! :) Batreeqah ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 00:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for helping the article expand!! :) Batreeqah ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 00:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]