User talk:Mean as custard

Ms Custard, you are welcome NBZfun (talk) 16:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mr Custard, Regarding the Nielsen page, we're updating a page that is terribly out of date and has not been edited for over 2 years. The revisions are not promotional. They are simply getting the content in line with the current reality of how the company operates. We will go back through it again and remove any items that feel a bit promotional, but I think if you read this new text closely it is meant to be factual. Thank you.

Most of the changes consisted of unreferenced puffery such as "Nielsen's information, insights and solutions help clients. . . " Mean as custard (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mr Custard, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deaconbluesx (talk • contribs) 16:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

We seem to have had a difference of opinion regarding my edits to the Bargoed and Gloucester entries. Apologies for the external link of one (pending Wikipedia entry) but the other deletion was Alun Hoddinott's page on Wikipedia. I'm sure he warranted the entry - CBE, Professor of Music at Cardiff, composed the fanfare for the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla 2005. Likewise the entry for Justin Edwards - BBC television, Radio France, New Jazz Aliens' BBC Radio 1 single of the week, Ballet Rambert, S4C television, linked to Uriah Heap's Lee Kerslake, Tubeway Army's Ian Evans, Best Instrumentalist nomination in category with Eric Clapton, BB King, Herbie Hancock and Little Richard. Born in Gloucester 1966, living in Bargoed.

All the best LividLegend (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: FW Lexicons

I have added the most recent and very useful FW Lexicons which have been edited by the University of Bucharest this year. They are a VERY valuable scientific resource for FW researchers. Universitate UB 13 Sept 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Universitate ub (talk • contribs) 20:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe; I won't remove the links this time, but suspect they won't last long before someone else removes them. . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mean as custard - Re: Giving Libary links

Dear Mean as custard,

Today you deleted my external links to the Giving Library. As a representative of the Giving Library, I do believe that these links add value.

The links on each organziation's Wikipedia page are designed to provide information on that organization, as well as give information on how people can be a part of the organization.

Would you consider changing your position on the value these Giving Library links add to each organization's Wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ntolch (talk • contribs) 20:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

No. Mean as custard (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mean as custard

You deleted a link I added to the external links section of the Executive Education wikipedia page.

IEDP is a trusted, neutral, knowledgeable industry source on this subject. There is a massive amount of useful information on this link and anyone clicking on it is to no commercial gain of ours.

An external link that hasn't been deleted as spam is the Financial Times - executive education section. This is a link with very similar breadth and quality content as ourselves. Could explain please why this link is allowed to remain and ours is marked as spam?

If you would like to have a quick look at the website you will see that IEDP are a leading, neutral voice on this subject and a link on this page adds significant value to the interested wikiepedia user: http://www.iedp.com/

Thank you Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan IEDP (talk • contribs) 11:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Mean as custard..

The Femen page has been heavily edited to include bias and misinformation. I was attempting to delete that info, and I'm sure i went about it incorrectly, how do i deal with a page that has been attacked? Thank you

Tankgrirl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tankgrill (talk • contribs) 19:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vista (IIM Bangalore)

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Vista (IIM Bangalore), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the page that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bhu777 (talk) 16:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi "Mean as custard",

I have edited the page in question to suit an encyclopedic format. I request you to please review and let me know any particular sections that you feel are not in line with the needs of the articles on Wikipedia. Bhu777 (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Landis+Gyr

Hi "Mean as custard",

While I appreciate your support in pointing out that the 'subject' in question may need improving in some parts I don't think automatically reverting to the old version is helpful either. The old page was completely removed for a reason as it doesn't reflect the 'subject' correctly from a corporate and legal point of view.

I would very much welcome your support in specifying specific areas where the current version can be improved as it will make the basis for this article being developed further in the future. The old version is a complete non-starter hence the complete overhaul. I appreciate that Wikipedia articles are always a work in progress and thus thanks in advance for your help.

Regards,

Fungai A. Mapondera Global Digital Media Manager, Landis+Gyr

Wikipedia articles are not intended to be written from a corporate and legal point of view. They are supposed to be from an independent, unbiased point of view. The changes were completely unreferenced and broke must of the Wikipedia guidelines on promotional language, conflict of interest and external links, so I felt it was best to revert to the last clean version. Some examples of wording are like a red rag to a Wikipedia bull: "A World leader in integrated energy management solutions". (Buzzwords are prevalent in the article - "solution" is used 17 times). . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the insight. I will look into making some edits ina draft during the course of the week and discuss with my team. However the page as it stands at the moment is unacceptable as it's incorrect.

I don't think you understand. Wikipedia articles are not intended to be written by corporate teams, but by independent unbiased individuals. At the most, it may be acceptable to correct specific errors of fact as long as references are provided to support the change. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:05, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Contrary to your message, I understand (perhaps not fully) and in the absence of accurate or any information at all it remains our responsibility to provide correct, impartial and unbiased information as you said. In light of your last change I have removed most of the content that I believe although unbiased falls within a gray area. May I draw your attention to General Electric's page here on Wikipdeia. The page touches on the company's history, location, power generation (in our case Smart Metering), corporate affairs, recognition, see also (although not as extensive as ours) etc. As the GE page remains untouched I have used this amongst other articles here on Wikipedia as a guideline for our article. The images that I have used are no different to those of GE's Gauges of locomotive at the Saskatchewan Railway Museum. Furthermore, almost every remaining paragraph has an external verifiable external link and reference. GE introduces terminology that I believe falls into the gray area, i.e. GE's long history of working with turbines in the power-generation field gave them the engineering know-how to move into.... The use of the term solution in our article is not used in trying to promote ourselves but rather it is the name of the product hence the image that is provided to depict this. It is a known terminology within smart metering industry and I believe it would be of interest to readers to know what instruments are combined to formulate what is deemed a smart metering/smart energy solution. Having said this, as I have said earlier, I have removed the possible content in the gray area and will continue to work on improving the article gradually. I am happy to get any pointers from you on the specific terminology and I can also explain to you how it is relevant in the smart metering and energy measurement and management area. Perhaps you may also want to read the 'see also' links that are provided to the various pages here on Wikipedia to learn more about the various topics raised in this article. Thanks once again for your input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fungai A. Mapondera (talk • contribs) 09:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You still don't get it.

The latest changes all still sound as though they were written by the corporate PR department, and not by an impartial observer:

"one of the top three leading providers of integrated Energy Management Solutions tailored to company needs"

"paving the way for the next generation"

"Landis+Gyr has a portfolio offering end-to-end..."

"aptly named the Gridstream™ suite"

"The company’s acquisition by Toshiba has presented it as a truly global smart grid company"

"Local authorities in France honored the suc-cess of Landis+Gyr"

etc. . .

Mean as custard (talk) 10:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

May you please refrain from saying I don't get it. Just because we differ on arguments (hence the talk function) doesn't warrant that kind of tone. I put it to you that it is you that may not grasp the notion of smart metering with reference to the various main players in this field in general. I gave you specific reference to GE's pages and I invite you to tell me what the difference between the sub-headings on this article and that on GE are. I registered under my name and have been making edits under my own name. With regards to the point you identified these are clearly referenced externally.

"one of the top three leading providers of integrated Energy Management Solutions tailored to company needs" (http://www.infraxinc.com/resources/collateral/documents/TheSmartGridin2010_2431.pdf)

"paving the way for the next generation" (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/elster-itron-landisgyr-nict-and-silver-spring-networks-drive-adoption-of-ieee-802154g-2012-05-07)

"Landis+Gyr has a portfolio offering end-to-end..." (this was only included to tone down the use of the term 'solution' which I already pointed out makes up part of a trademarked term Gridstream Solution)

"aptly named the Gridstream™ suite" the term suite is widely used on Wikipedia and in this context it is used to identify the collection of items that make up Gridstream. Agian I fail to see how this is inappropriate.

"The company’s acquisition by Toshiba has presented it as a truly global smart grid company" - again this is a referenced sentence as it was taken out of third party material. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/23/idUS315377614920110523).

I therefore invite you to read these referenced links and any other that are next to these statements before making arbitrary changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fungai A. Mapondera (talk • contribs) 12:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no knowledge of Landis+Gyr or Gridstream. However I have gained some experience of how Wikipedia works and its guidelines on promotional material and conflict of interest. I suggest that instead of making any further edits to the article about your company, you should familiarise yourself with Wikipedia by improving unrelated articles like Hypena sordidula, Abdullah Kassim Hanga or Ballymacward. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

While I fully acknowledge your experience of how Wikipedia works, I also don't believe that Wikipedia advocates for the promotion of false information neither as is set out in the page that you keep reverting back to. I have made changes in this page you have reverted back to and have reused the content that is in that page but set the record straight regarding such items as Cameron O'Reily and his implied involvement with the company presently. That is part of the history and not the focus of the whole article as the reverted article tries to portray. The article you had reverted to also mentions a subheading called products. I have removed this as not only does it include peacock terminology, I believe it doesn't reflect the subject of products accurately. I am happy to improve on the article going forward if you believe there are areas that need improving. What I am against is the arbitrary reverting to an old version that is completely incorrect in its current format (hence the minor rearranging that I have done to the text and expansion of some areas i.e. acquisitions). I am noting this as any individual that may have knowledge of Landis+Gyr and not merely making a promotion.

While I welcome the idea of further familiarizing myself with other aspects of Wikipedia as suggested, I put it to you that the suggested topics in your response interest me. In particular with reference to Abdullah Kassim Hanga, contrary to what my username may suggest, I am NOT Tanzanian thus I have no knowledge nor interest in improving this article. May I put it on record that I find it offensive if that's what your suggestion was implying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fungai A. Mapondera (talk • contribs) 13:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You have already acknowledged that you are "Global Digital Media Manager" at Landis+Gyr; other than that I have no knowledge of who you are or your nationality. The suggestions of articles I gave were generated from the "Random article" function. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Basically Mean As Custard means that someone totally ignorant of a field has precedent over someone who knows a lot about the subject. The appeal to "independant sources" is pathetic. Thisistheanswer12 (talk • contribs) 11:10, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Harrow Hong Kong

Hi you reverted back revisions to the harrow Hongkong page, I just just wonder why? the school is now built and the information being added is what the school will actually be like.

Because the content you removed had references to independent sources to back it up, and the content you added had no references. . . Mean as custard (talk)

Ok I see that now, is it ok to add some new content along side the current content? if so I will do that.hismassive

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Mean as custard! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Purnell School

I hope in the future that you improve as an editor. This is not meant to be offensive. It is simply a request that you take a little more time to think about the repercussions of your actions then you apparently do when you delete things enmasse...I have not gone through your deletions in this article in its entirety but deletion seems to have eradicated pertinent information as well as less substantive information - throwing the fish out with the backwater, so to speak.Stevenmitchell (talk) 12:08, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

All the material I removed was promotional, unencyclopedic and unreferenced. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

It was also the history of the school by someone with apparent firsthand knowledge... If you didn't think it was properly referenced, you should have marked it as such in the article and explained why in the Talk Section. Unless you were part of that history as they appear to have firsthand knowledge of it, I don't see how you can be a self-appointed censor of their edit. Stevenmitchell (talk) 12:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I try to follow Wikipedia guidelines in all my edits, and "firsthand knowledge" is not a valid source of information for a Wikipedia article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Indiana University Kokomo

You deleted everything from the Indiana University Kokomo wikipedia site that I have been working to update. I will make the information less promotional. However, everything had some type of reference for now. We are working out kinks with third-party references. The information that is currently on the site is not referenced or cited by proper sources, and the information is completely outdated at this time. Could you please revert your changes and put the deleted information back on the site? As Wikipedia is constantly changing, surely you can understand that progress must start somewhere. Maryolk (talk) 13:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)Mary Olk

If I was to reinstate the changes they would probably only be removed again by another Wikipedia editor. The content was far too promotional. It is not meant to be a college prospectus, simply an unbiased description of the University's main features. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. Please consider returning to Learon Edutech and cleaning up, as well as tagging appropriately for deletion. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sigma Paints

Hi Mean as custard! I saw that you nominated the article for Sigma Paints for speedy deletion. I did a bit of research about the company, and while the article isn't perfect, it might merit inclusion. I was bold and moved it to general deletion discussions instead, for notability. You can see my nomination here. Thank you for your vigilance in monitoring articles such as this, and all your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your good work. You clearly put a good deal of time into such matters as dealing with promotional editors. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Lightning MultiCom

I see that your PROD on Lightning MultiCom has been contested by the author of the article, a clear COI SPA now blocked. You may like to take it to AfD. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:16, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Black Diamond Equipment

Hi Mean as Custard -

I added info to the Black Diamond Equipment page - if anything appears too soap-box like, please let me know, but everything is factual info. There was also a discrepancy between information that was on the page related to Black Diamond Inc., which is not the same as Black Diamond Equipment. Thanks for your help!

(Blackdiamondusa (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC))

The problem is that the changes were very promotional in tone, and no individual references were cited. For example, it may well be true that "Black Diamond is a company comprised of passionate climbers and skiers, and the company takes pride in its rich employee culture", but without a reference to an independent source confirming this, it will just be considered as marketing hype. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

So will edits with references to the Black Diamond website be accepted provided that they are factual? Many of the company's historical and product-related history is only found there...Thanks. (Blackdiamondusa (talk) 19:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC))

And also, there are things I removed from the page due to the fact that they are referencing Black Diamond, Inc., which is the parent company of Black Diamond Equipment - should have its own page for much of that info. Thanks. (Blackdiamondusa (talk) 19:20, 30 July 2012 (UTC))

I think Wikipedia:Conflict of interest ought to provide some of the answers. Factual historical information from the Black Diamond website should be fine, but information which might otherwise be interpreted as promotional (such as company culture, philanthropy and awards) should be sourced from independent, unbiased references. I also suggest you change your username as names which appear to represent organizations rather than individuals are not allowed on Wikipedia. . Mean as custard (talk) 19:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I have submitted a request for username change and have cleaned up the info with references. Awards and philanthropy sections are linked to Black Diamond website, as linking each individual award/group supported would get a little excessive. Thanks again. (Blackdiamondusa (talk) 19:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC))

Warburg Pincus

Hey Mean as custard, I worked on the Warburg Pincus article and I agree the IPO, Venture Capital and Growth Capital sections do read kind of brochure like. I want to help improve it but I wanted to see if that was specifically what you were referring to when you flagged it. Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks --Monstermike99 (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Most of the article is fine. It's just a few promotional-sounding statements like "Warburg Pincus brings scale, global capabilities and domain knowledge". . . Mean as custard (talk) 06:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Understood, I will make the changes and thanks. --Monstermike99 (talk) 14:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Cape Henry Collegiate School

Thanks for fighting the good fight over there. I've started this: Wikipedia:Coin#Cape_Henry_Collegiate_School in case you're interested. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The No Spam Barnstar
	For deleting numerous spam pages. Vincent Liu (something to say?) 05:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Bakeware02

Hello. I declined your speedy deletion nomination of User:Bakeware02. This is because the article does not promote an entity, person, or product, which is required for an article to be speedy deleted under G11. While the page could be deleted under WP:PROD for WP:NOTGUIDE, in this case the page is not an article, which means that the proposed deletion process cannot be used.--Slon02 (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've just removed the spam link from the page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Your Shakespeare Theatre Company advert tag.

Good morning

Could you please be more specific about why you flagged this article as an advertisement? Which content do your regard as promotional which could be rewritten from a neutral point of view, and which external links do you think are promotional?

Thank you

ed

Ecragg (talk) 11:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've weeded out the worst of the promotional material. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Streamworks International

A buzzword box was placed into a section of the article Streamworks International. I have since modified the section based on more sources found about the subject. Would you be so kind as to look at the section and give me feedback on whether the section has been improved? Thanks! Ryoga3099 (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat improved, but I have no idea what a "delivery solution" is, so the buzzword tag remains for now. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I have looked at the sources/references again and edited that paragraph. It now says:

Their Universal Delivery Network (uDN) utilizes their own points of presence (PoP) and third-party data centres to achieve delivery of multimedia data globally to multiple content delivery networks (CDNs), mobile network operators, and internet service providers (ISPs).

Better? Will try and find more sources to elaborate on this subject. Ryoga3099 (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The section still means absolutely nothing to me, but it now consists of technical jargon rather than buzzwords, so I have removed the tag. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk page move

You created User talk:KaylaS123Xx/sandbox. I have moved it to User talk:KaylaS123Xx, as I have no doubt that was what you intended. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:28, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Warn user

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Sheffield United F.C you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Daonguyen95 (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Fulanito

Hello, I want to thank you for your recent edit on the Fulanito page. It has been the topic of a recent edit war. The user who's name is "FulanitoReal" has been vandalizing the page with misleading information. It just so happens to be that he actually is the former partner to the artist, and refuses to acknowledge any works done since afer their partnership ended in 2002. The material is evident through products that have been distributed since 2003. The current image happens to be the latest EP release by Fulanito. This user has been purposely preventing its display by placing his own image.

I am requesting that he be blocked, or if you can lead me somewhere where I can request protection to the page, or have other editors place more inpartial information that willl help solidify its integrity.

I thank you for your time --*** Verdugo27***_talk 21:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Good work on the tea company

Good work on the tea company. I am sure you know which one. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi There

	Hi There
	Would like to have conference call for better understanding on how wikipedia works, can you please pass on your contact details on the below id online.desk@uaeexchange.com, alex.fernandes@uaeexchange.com Y Sudhir Kumar Shetty (talk) 05:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

That's not the way it works. You spam Wikipedia, you get blocked. . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Hiii

kindly restrain from adding irrelevant tags and POV 14.139.95.194 (talk) 08:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Certainly! And then may I clean your shoes for you? . . Mean as custard (talk)

Unexplained removal

It is possible that the material you removed from Financial Services and Markets Authority (Belgium) deserves removal; I haven't look closely at it. At a minimum it ought to be referenced. However, lack of proper references does not usually result in simple deletion (except ant he case of certain material in connection with BLPs, which is not the case here)

If you removed it for copyright concerns, please check the talk page. If you removed it for other reasons, please explain on the talk page; your edit summaries provided me with no indications.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Clearly you did not review the history of the changes. Referenced material was removed and replaced by unreferenced, by a user with a clear conflict of interest. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your removal from Financial Services and Markets Authority (Belgium) lately. Users are still deleting referenced material on this page. --Chanewin(Talk) 15:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For your timely rollback of the vandalism on my talk page. Well done Prestonmag (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Spam

Hey. If you see spam, please tag with a speedy deletion tag (WP:G11) and have it deleted instead of simply blanking the page. Thanks for your hard work. --Guerillero | My Talk 00:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Seconding this - thanks for all the hard work you've been doing in this area! Also, when you tag a page for deletion, would you consider tagging the talk page of the user who created it with {{subst:db-spam-notice}} or something similar? If the users are warned about what they did wrong then some of them might just turn into productive contributors. (And if they don't, the warning will at least give them some idea of what they did wrong.) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 14:23, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

FitnessX Magazine

Hello, I've removed the speedy following a re-write. It should probably go to AFD though, as I can't find any evidence online for notability. Thanks, Lone boatman (talk) 10:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mean as custard

You deleted a link I added to the external links section of the Executive Education wikipedia page.

IEDP is a trusted, neutral, knowledgeable industry source on this subject. There is a massive amount of useful information on this link and anyone clicking on it is to no commercial gain of ours.

An external link that hasn't been deleted as spam is the Financial Times - executive education section. This is a link with very similar breadth and quality content as ourselves. Could explain please why this link is allowed to remain and ours is marked as spam?

If you would like to have a quick look at the website you will see that IEDP are a leading, neutral voice on this subject and a link on this page adds significant value to the interested wikiepedia user: http://www.iedp.com/

Thank you Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan IEDP (talk • contribs) 12:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

You added it to the end of the list of references without explanation. Wikipedia is supposed to be a stand-alone encyclopedia, not a collection of external links. See Wikipedia:External links. Your user name suggests you are affiliated with IEDP so a look at WP:COI may also be in order. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:00, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Big Ben: units of measurement

Hi. I noticed you reverted my edit to the Big Ben article in which I restored the unit order to metric first, as per the WP:UNITS guidelines; could you advise me as to the reason for the reversion?

WP:UNITS advises that the primary unit in a UK-related, non-scientific article is generally a metric unit except for road distances and speeds, personal height and weight measurement, and a few other exceptions.

Also, I use the term "restored" as the unit order of the article in question was originally metric first and had been for several years, but was flipped to imperial first on 10th April by user Ohconfucius; at the same time, he/she had had been removing American English spellings from the article, so it is possible that he/she mistakenly assumed that UK articles always use imperial units first. Mixsynth (talk) 09:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Because when Big Ben was built imperial units only were used; those given in the article are precise while the metric equivalents are only rounded approximations. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

It's true that Big Ben was (probably) designed using imperial units, but there's no connection between the imperial measurements now in the article and any measurements taken at time of construction; the original figures in the article were almost all metric (browse the code of the last edit before my own, in particular the {{convert}} tags) but were manually overwritten only three days ago by user Dkr1d9fs with the derived rounded imperial figures – for reasons unknown.

Browse back through the article's edit history and check for yourself. Mixsynth (talk) 22:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Minecraft spammers

When you find accounts that are spamming "minecraft gift codes" on their userpages, please report them instead of just blanking the pages; those accounts need to be blocked (they supply malware). DS (talk) 15:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Colby College

Yes, a post-modern fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jleasoutsz (talk • contribs) 12:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Sources

Read the rules. Everything on Wikipedia must have a source.Padlokasul (talk) 20:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

If this rule was enforced rigidly then half the content of Wikipedia would have to be removed. . .

Hi Mean as Custard. Re: Regarding tagging IIM Kashipur page as Ad.

Hello Mr Custard. Regarding IIM Kashipur page, we have removed the promotional content from the page and made it look neutral. The revisions made are not promotional in any manner. We have cited references where ever possible. We think if you read the content now you will feel it is factual. Please go through it and let us know your suggestions. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avinashdevulapalli (talk • contribs) 15:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks ok now. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Rollbacking

Hi, this is gentle reminder that rollback is only for reverting vandalism. This edit was made in good faith and the registered user would probably not understand why he was reverted. Edit summaries really help other editors understand each other's changes and teaches good editing practice. Thanks. Span (talk) 11:49, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

PREST

Cannot this be reported ????

Dealing with advertising

If you encounter a page of advertising on Wikipedia, you can flag it for administrator attention with the template {{db-spam}}. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

what re you doing

what are you doing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atyendro (talk • contribs) 20:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Mark Pegg - Redirect

Hi Mean as Custard Please reconsidere your revision of this page deletion. Citations have now bee added to the Mark Pegg (actor) page. It is misleading to have all "Mark Pegg" searches automatically forwarded to "Mark Gregory Pegg". Regards Jez

It should be turned into a disambiguation page in that case. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

NIKK - Nordic Gender Institute

Dear Mean as custard

I have tried to change information on the closing of NIKK as a Nordic institution, but you have revered my changes three times without any motivation. It was stated that the reason was the TV documentary made by Harald Eia. But the researchers interviewed in the TV documentary was Norwegian researchers and they were not employed by NIKK. The reason for closing NIKK was to save administrative costs. The Nordic ministers of gender equality have also decided to reopen NIKK as a co-operative body. Thus, the work will be continued in another form.

Here are some links on the decision of closing NIKK as an independent Nordic institution and the decision of the continuation as a co-operative body:

NIKK is dead – long live NIKK!

Concerns about the dismantling of the Nordic Gender Institute (NIKK)

Document of the decision (in Danish):

Ministerrådsforslag om omdannelse af NIKK til samarbejdsorgan

Statement made by the Swedish Minister of Gender Equality (in Swedish):

Svar på skriftlig fråga 2011/12:139 Nikk - det nordiska institutet för kunskap om kön

I would appreciate if you could reconsider your position.

(Xparbo (talk) 12:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC))