User talk:David Biddulph

Wellington

Hi Why did you delete my addition to noteable persons in Wellington (Telford & Wrekin)? thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.1.250.231 (talk) 11:31, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

In my edit summary I gave a link to WP:WTAF. I now see that an article for Tony McPhee does exist, although you didn't link to it. I have self-reverted and included the link which you had omitted. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.1.250.231 (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

The Donkey Sanctuary of Canada

This is curious. You refer to this article on The Teahouse as having a red link and yet it is blue, and when I go to its history, there's no indication it was ever deleted.

Oh, wait, the history doesn't go back as far as the date of your Teahouse response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Vchimpanzee: It was first created at 20:09, 3 August 2016, deleted at 05:50, 4 August 2016, and recreated at 17:37, 5 August 2016. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:42, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Medallists

You're completely right, I don't know what I'm thinking. Good job you are checking. Thanks Aloneinthewild (talk) 21:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Jack Pearson (musician)

I am concerned and curious as to why you made so many incorrect changes on my draft of Jack Pearson? There are so many errors that I am afraid I have to completely start over and I'm not sure how to do that? Could you have asked about FACTS before doing this? Can you undo them? HELP!! musicfan (talk) 16:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Which changes of mine do you believe were incorrect, and why? Looking at the history of Draft:Jack Pearson (musician), the first edit I made was to repair a broken link, and my second edit was to revert your removal of a review comment, as such comments are left in the draft for the benefit of subsequent reviewers, but I did self-revert that change. My most recent edit was to add a comment to the effect that 3 of the 4 refs are from the subject's own website and that we need independent sources. Which of those changes do you consider "incorrect", and why? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Jackguitarfan. I did make a number of changes to your draft because I thought they were improvements and brought the article more inline with Wikipedia's manual of style, etc. Normally, I am not so bold when it comes to editing the drafts of other editors, and only do so when specifically requested. FWIW, I only edited the article after I noticed some others beside yourself working on it; one of them (Jak525) even thanked me multiple times. I am assuming in good faith that you and Jak525 are not the same person, so I can go back try and undo the changes I made if you wish. Moreover, I apologize if this made a mess of your draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Well between you and Jak525 you undid a full days work and took out my words and put in direct copy from other sources - his website and magazine articles making it copyright infringement. So I have had to spend most of my day REDOING the page and formatting and inserting new information. Is it common practice for people to go in and completely redo someone else's "draft" pages? I am stunned to be honest. I have no idea who Jak525 is....? Your name was the only one that came up in my notes. Please leave it be - I've already reverted the incorrect changes. Thank you. musicfan (talk) 02:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Just for reference Jackguitarfan, the edits I made (here, here, here, here, here and here) had only to do with formatting of the content already in the article. I did not add/remove any content from the article. It looks like the copy violations started with the major expansion of the article you made on August 18. The only information that was removed by deleted by Diannaa seems to be content that you added yourself; none of the edits made by myself or the other editors was revision deleted. Just for reference, it's not only articles we create/edit that we do not own, but we also do do not own our userpages/drafts and they can be edited by any editor at anytime. Usually experienced editors will refrain from doing so, unless there is a serious policy violation (such as a copyright violation or WP:BLP violation) which requires immediate attention. So, I will refrain from editing your draft in the future per your request, unless there is something requiring immediate attention. If you would like to discuss this further or have any specific questions about the edits I made then feel free to do so on my user talk page or at Draft talk:Jack Pearson (musician) and I will be happy to answer them as best as I can. I've already created enough unnecessary drama here on David's user talk page, so there's no need for me to create anymore. Best of luck with your draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:32, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Marchjuly ~ but the only thing I thought you were deleting, changing or correcting (pointing out) was the photo copyright issue. musicfan 05:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackguitarfan (talk • contribs)

I'd firstly like to confirm on my own end as well that I am not Jackguitarfan; rather, a new contributor who was/is simply looking to help. In this case, such help included expanding upon some things and improving on the neutral point of view - all in good faith. If it's your wish, however, I will cease editing the draft.

My apologies for any harm done. --Jak525 (talk) 06:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Olympic medal table

It is common practice on Olympic medal table articles to not include bronze medals until the entire event is complete. Hence, GBR's bronze in boxing should not be included until the whole event is complete. There is an ongoing discussion on the talk page as to whether this is proper. Please discuss there rather than edit war. Thanks. Smartyllama (talk) 13:14, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Hybrid Air Vehicles HAV 304 Airlander 10

On 19 August 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Hybrid Air Vehicles HAV 304 Airlander 10, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:11, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

ref link repetation

Same link is useful for more than one content in the article. Is there a way to name a ref and reuse it? --SmithaShanmugam (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

You presumably still haven't read Help:Referencing for beginners? The relevant section is Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

While you are there, I assume that you probably weren't the author of every webpage and newspaper article that you've quoted as references? If you weren't the author, then you shouldn't put your name in the author name fields in the citation. If you were the author of all of them you haven't really established that multiple independent sources have written about the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Was looking through that page, wanted an example, hence asked for help. and with respect to author names, got confused as wiki article author. Have already removed my name from author. Thanks for notifying. --SmithaShanmugam (talk) 18:55, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lists of Olympic medalists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jade Jones (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) 10:26, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

--David Biddulph (talk) 17:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Oscar Peterson Plays George Gershwin. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Publishing

I just saw your question at VPT. Rather than delaying the archive bot any longer, I thought I'd reply here:

There is some information at m:Editing/Publish. Also, here at the English Wikipedia, I don't think that anyone has any idea how many help and introduction pages will need to be updated. However, Special:WhatLinksHere/MediaWiki:Savearticle lists pages that transclude the old label, which might make a reasonably starting point. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 07:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. It worries me that people are thinking of making such a change without having considered the consequences. I still feel that the confusion will be great, and of course others have pointed out that the confusion will be greatest when drafts are being edited, where there is a big difference between saving an updated draft and publishing the article to Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

They have considered the consequences. They've just decided that the benefit outweighs the cost (at least slightly, and only in the long term). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

That confirms that the people making the decisions don't understand. One of many decisions made with precious little input from real editors, most of whom are unaware of what's being threatened. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

My own team is entirely composed of "real editors", and several of the devs involved in this particular change are not only "real editors" with a history of thousands of edits, but even long-time admins right here at the English Wikipedia. They also understand that user documentation for new editors is a sprawling mess here at the English Wikipedia, and that consequently correcting the labels will require far more work here than at any other wiki. I think therefore that they actually do understand the costs.

As for the belief that this was decided "with precious little input from real editors", I've been told that the problem was openly discussed not only at several Wikimania events but also in the old strategy: wiki, whose sole purpose was to turn the input from real editors into a list of tasks and goals that could be achieved (remember that year-plus-long planning project back in 2009–2010?). So I've got lots of sympathy for this problem (mixed with some self-pity: several pages in said sprawling mess are maintained primarily by me), but I don't think that it is accurate to say that nobody cares or understands or listened to the editors. We can, if you want, fault them for apparently sitting on their fingers for the last five years, rather than doing it while the documentation mess was slightly smaller. However, making this change (again: this is supposedly the fourth change to this button's label) was never going to be easy, and perhaps it is only too understandable if they didn't want to upset their fellow editors with a change that requires updating so many help pages once. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Actually...

Hello Mr. Biddulph, I'd like to contest the notion that my recent edits were vandalistic. I noticed that the articles I edited weren't up to date, so, like any good Wikipedian would, I changed it. #Brexit? Isn't it a thing that happened? Thanks, JosueGSMST — Preceding unsigned comment added by JosueGSMST (talk • contribs) 23:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Firstly your message was misplaced. New messages are placed at the foot of a talk page. You are lucky that I noticed it. Secondly you did not sign your message, see WP:Signature. Thirdly, no. Brexit has not happened. If and when it does, relevant changes can be made to Wikipedia, but at present the UK remains part of the European Union, and it will continue to be part of Europe even after any Brexit. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXV, September 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Peacemaker67 and Nick-D on Nazi terror and covert warfare Op-ed: Hawkeye7 looks at Australians on the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for looking at my page. -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Brickey

I am now getting a check date value???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayhawk84 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Another editor has corrected it by adding a space in this edit. Two other minor points. One is that new topics on a talk page go at the foot of the page, so I've moved this. The other is that a wikilink like Frank Brickey is more readable than a url like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Brickey. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Watford Junction railway station

Re this edit and your summary, maybe it would be better to check before reverting IPs who add material in good faith. Mjroots (talk) 08:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I didn't say that the edit wasn't in good faith. I said that it was unsourced and erroneous. The derailment did not take place at 06:19, as that was when the train left Milton Keynes. Also, the train in question did not have an "engine"; it was a multiple unit. Naturally it would be reasonable to add a factually correct report with a reference. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Deletion

I do not understand your decision to delete my page when I provides information on topics that many people search descriminatoire I find your decision especially when the course Wiki page many are not consistent to your so-called ethics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Moshe Ayache (talk • contribs) 10:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid that your message is incoherent. It may be wise for you to avoid the English Wikipedia and stick to editing a Wikipedia in your own language. I took the liberty of adding a section heading, as I do not believe that you were discussing Watford Junction railway station. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I do not understand your decision to delete my page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yves Moshe Ayache (talk • contribs) 11:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC) Yves Moshe Ayache (talk) 11:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

3RR template

Hi David,

Thank you for correcting my attempt to add a three-reverts template to NVG13DAO's talk page. It was the first time I had used this template, and I still (after further reading) don't know how to do it. I had followed the advice here which recommends "posting a {{uw-3rr}} template message on their user talk page"; and I should have realised that I should also have signed it. But how would I "subst"? Maproom (talk) 09:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Maproom: See WP:SUBST. Just type in {{subst:uw-3rr}} plus the four tildes. You can use {{subst:uw-3rr|JT LeRoy}} if you want to specify the article. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:25, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll make a not of that. Maproom (talk) 13:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

New newsletter for Notifications

Hello

You are subscribing to the Notifications newsletter on English Wikipedia.

That newsletter is now replaced by the monthly and multilingual Collaboration team newsletter, which will include information and updates concerning Notifications but also concerning Flow and Edit Review Improvements.

Please subscribe!

All the best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Theresa May cabinet

Thank you for notifying me of the error. However, please be advised that the change was made in my Sandbox. So, I am unaware of how this was reflected on another page. I have rectified the issue to the best of my ability; and, I hope the issue does not arise again.

Mrsolan22 (talk) 04:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You removed content from Template:Theresa May cabinet 1 vertical twice: this one on 24 September and this second one on 30 September. Your similar edit to your sandbox wasn't until this morning. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail! Check your mail!

Hello, David Biddulph. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

VarunFEB2003 12:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVI, October 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at recent works Op-ed: TomStar81 on the evolution of the tank Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I think I fixed my signature;

-- AI RPer (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Better than it was, but still 427 bytes, rather than 255 max as given at WP:SIGLEN. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:47, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

It also contravenes WP:SIG#NT since it uses 7 parser function calls. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

FYI, blocked as a sock. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:52, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:31, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Verifying the problem with my edit of adding a comment for editors, a comment invisible to readers

Hi David,

Did I bungle this edit, which is just really an added comment for editors, invisible to readers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_international_presidential_trips_made_by_Benigno_Aquino_III&oldid=prev&diff=744509487

As far as I can tell, after checking before & after I made my change, & after you made your change of reverting my change, I just really added a comment for editors, which are invisible to readers?

In fact, I made another test edit, which you can verify?

Thanks,

Reggie Reggiehg (talk) 19:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The place for suggestions is on the article talk page, not in the article itself. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you David!

Re: Theresia Gouw image...I didn't see the message you pointed out. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrosato (talk • contribs) 14:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 03:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Polish palaces

Hi David, thank you for your knowledgeable help in fixing the Wikidata for pl:Pałac Lubomirskich w Krakowie re Lubomirski Palace (Opole Lubelskie) on 22 September. I completely forgot about my post on the Help Desk and only just found it in my contribs. Thanks again. >MinorProphet (talk) 21:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXVII, November 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at two new books on the US military Interview: A chat with our new project coordinators Review essay: Nick-D discusses recent works on the British and Australian Armies in World War I Op-ed: TomStar81 on the end of the Battle of the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Allchurches Trust

I have made changes to this page to correct an error and to expand on the content. I couldn't work out how to send you the proposals before making the changes - and have only just done so. Many apologies. I also left a message for you at the bottom of the entry but suspect it didn't reach you - I probably put it in the wrong place. I wanted to alert you to the fact that I am currently a consultant to Allchurches Trust and therefore being paid for what I do including amending their entry here. I believe I have followed the guidelines - apart from being unable to work out how to contact you first and doing it the wrong way round. The page is now consistent with information elsewhere, including its own website. Is the entry acceptable?

References

Joanna Biddolph (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

You forgot to provide a link to the article in question, which is Allchurches Trust. There are a number of problems. Firstly you have violated Wikipedia's terms and conditions by not providing on your user a page a declaration of paid editing. Secondly you say "The page is now consistent with information elsewhere, including its own website", but in doing so you have copied verbatim from the subject's website and therefore committed a copyright violation. In general the content of a subject's website is not suitable for an encyclopedia, see WP:conflict of interest, but if anything is suitable for inclusion it needs the copyright holder to donate the copyright by the process given for donating copyrighted material. Thirdly the article is not properly referenced, see Help:Referencing for beginners. Fourthly the #External links section was malformatted, which I've corrected in this edit but there seem to be too many links so you need to read WP:External links. Fifthly (but fundamentally) you have not provided evidence that the organisation is notable in Wikipedia's terms, which means being the subject of significant coverage in published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:31, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for replying so swiftly. I admit to finding Wikipedia complex to navigate. I had looked at all the guidance I thought I had to look at; each page leads to another which leads to another and that is where I get confused. I am also easily foxed by an absence of links I assume will be there - such as a Reply link to messages from you. I expect I am typing this in the wrong place and without a marker that alerts you to it. I just can't find it and the advice I received to a request for help didn't cover how to reply to a message from an editor as I didn't know it wouldn't be clear. On your points in the order you made them: · a link to the article - I did include a link and I can see it above but I assume it isn't in the right format (it is between the <ref></ref> symbols; I have just seen (while typing below) your follow up message; I don't seem to have a user page which is why I posted it there; I have not anticipated being a serial user - beyond using Wikipedia as a source of information as any other user does; I will create a user page after finishing this reply; · declaration of paid editing - I have now done this; I had read the guidelines but clearly not understood them; I expect to charge a fee for one hour of my time for this work; · copyright issues - the information is available to others to use without restriction but I will amend the text so it is different; it is hard to know how to do this with lists since a list is a list; · properly referenced - I will refer to this guidance; I thought I had included links to other pages on Wikipedia and outside links but perhaps I've used the wrong format or misunderstood; · malformatting - again, I thought I had followed formatting rules; many thanks for correcting my errors; · notability - the page existed before I edited it; I don't know how long it had been on Wikipedia or who put it on Wikipedia; I sought to correct a significant error and that was the starting point; I will add notability - it is a relatively large charity but works quietly without seeking coverage so perhaps it doesn't count in Wikipedia terms.

Joanna Biddolph (talk) 15:21, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

I have now made changes to fit with your guidance and would be grateful if you would let me know if there is anything else I should do. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 15:46, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi David, I wonder if we could revert to the original entry - two sentences long, I believe - with a correction to one of the sentences. I am not happy with a page that talks of multiple issues and violations when it is not Allchurches Trust that has made the mistakes; it was me, inadvertently after referring to various pages of guidance but, as I now know, not the right ones. No-one knows who put up the original page; the immediate concern was to correct the error it contained; I sought to improve the page. Not understanding all the issues was my error and I don't want to affect Allchurches Trust's reputation. If the amended version is not acceptable, and it could be reversed to the original, and the warnings and comments removed, I'd be very grateful. I'm happy to make the change to correct the error if that is how it works. If it is for you to do, it is the sentence that stated, wrongly, that Allchurches Trust is affiliated to the Church of England. It isn't. It is independent of all the churches and charities it supports. If the sentence could be changed to that, I would be grateful. The remainder of the page would be as it was originally - the only other information was the Categories which are determined by Wikipedia. I look forward to hearing from you. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 03:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for making that change. I really appreciate it. Joanna Biddolph (talk) 00:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The Help Desk Contributor Recognition

	The Help Desk National Hero Award
	Your work and contributions at the Help Desk are exemplary. With intelligent and most helpful inputs, you are truly a Help Desk National Hero :) Keep up the great work! ❤️ Lourdes 17:27, 16 November 2016 (UTC)