User talk:Jlg80

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Jlg80/Harry Reid has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Reid, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 14:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted.; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Harry Reid. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 09:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Harry Reid (publisher), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
• You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.
• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the Help desk or on the reviewer's talk page
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:42, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Revd Richmond W. Phillips

I reverted your edit in Benjamin Britten because it's quite clear from Humphrey Carpenter's book that he is referring to Phillips's successor, Thomas Sewell (see pp. 9-10). Whereas Phillips, in Carpenter's book, is remembered as "a dear old man" by John Pounder, Sewell is remembered as having beaten his pupils "on the slightest pretext". If you can find a reliable citation that Phillips retired in 1923 (as you said in the edit I've reverted), then by all means provide it. But otherwise the text you tried to insert doesn't begin to stand against the standard citations. Sorry. Alfietucker (talk) 13:37, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Benjamin Britten

So sorry to be a wet blanket, but I've removed your recent addition of the 1962 work (Op 67) in the 1920s section. It is an obscure piece and its inclusion in the wrong chronological place breaks the flow of the narrative. If you feel strongly that it should be included we could, I suggest, add it as a footnote. Tim riley (talk) 21:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)