User talk:Restocking

Handling COI editing

~~If you have any grounds for your accusations, please take them to WP:COIN.~~ Until consensus is reached at WP:COIN, please stop removing material from articles based upon coi accusations, and please note that a coi alone is rarely reason to remove any material at all. --Ronz (talk) 18:17, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. Only the most egregious offenses were removed. I've noticed most of the articles could probably benefit from a re-write, and I'm going to try and help with that. Thanks again! --Restocking (talk) 11:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Can you indicate exactly where and when Rvancopp gave information on his employer [1]?~~ Nevermind. I found it. I'll start the COIN report. --Ronz (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is here. --Ronz (talk) 19:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Container crane

I reverted your edit [2], restoring the full reference information. Does the sentence belong at all though? --Ronz (talk) 15:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Rvancopp

I removed your duplicate edit to Rvancopp's talk page. Having it at the COIN discussion is fine, but duplicating it borders on WP:OUTING. --Ronz (talk) 16:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Had no clue. Sorry about that! --Restocking (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Konecranes article

Hello! You have left a note on Konecranes article: "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view". Since that the article has been edited a lot. Could you check it and tell me what are the things that annoy you? The article is quite similar than the Finnish article and people have not complained about that so far.--Jjanhone (talk) 08:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]