Talk:Tell MAMA

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please read before editing

This article concerns the organisation - its figures, views, funds, reaction. Please do NOT use this article as a register of crimes against Muslims. Indiasummer95 (talk) 23:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tell MAMA response

There have been various additions to Andrew Gilligan's article, including from myself (albeit a good part of this was shunting material which had been left by another editor under the wrong sub-heading), which makes it all the more important that the following vague sentence in "Tell MAMA response" is replaced with something more substantive: "It produced a rebuttal to the rest of Gilligan's main accusations."

I'm stopping now because it's v late over here in the UK, but maybe someone else can actually check the Tell MAMA article and see which points/accusations it actually rebuts. For instance, there's nothing about the specific Twitter incidents Gilligan mentions, for instance, that I can see. That is not to say they are the most substantive points, but I think we ought to make clear *which* points exactly were rebutted and how. Alfietucker (talk) 00:46, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Burton

Someone editing without logging in has made an edit in connection with Tim Burton, and twice repeated it after it was reverted by two different editors, if I am not mistaken. The latest occurrence if this edit is here. This edit remov3es sourced info that I, for one think relevant, and adds the info that Burton later ran unsuccessfully for political office. I don't see how this is relevant to Burton's interactions with Tell MAMA, as his candidacy occurred only after those interactions were finished, and the subject of those interactions was not raise in his campaign -- or if they were, the source cited in the edit doesn't seem to say so. Thus I claim that this is irrelevant to this article, although it might be relevant in a biographical article about Burton. It is also WP:UNDUE as a possible attempt to reduce Burton's credibility bu mentioning collateral matter. Whether that was the intention or not, that is the practical effect, so per WP:UNDUE the text does not belong here. DES ^(talk) 01:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The information about the election result has again been inserted and removed. However, I have removed the previously present inline external link to an unreliable blog, apparently that of Burton, and the unsourced mention of a "folk ballad". If anyone has a policy-based reason why the election result should be mentioned in this article, please explain it here. DES ^(talk) 17:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The comments made about Timothy Martin Burton are accurate and they are being relogged when they are knowingly false. 'The ballad of.....' is nonsense and has been put there with no reference or link. Please remove and the links to this individual are accurate. Suggest that they are not removed since they are verifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.232.37 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 28 July 2015‎ moved from section below to appropriate thread DES ^(talk) 21:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]

The "ballad of" text was indeed improper and has been removed, my apologies for not doing so sooner. So has the inline link to Butron's blog. as I said above. But none of that is a reason for inserting the election result in the article. DES ^(talk) 21:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous ip edits

There are recent contentious edits by anonymous ips. These appear to have been made on behalf of Tell MAMA Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Help_dealing_with_abusive_account_modifying_our_Wiki_page.--Flexdream (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Working link to now archived question - Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_366#Help_dealing_with_abusive_account_modifying_our_Wiki_page. That admission and this silent edit made by anonymous ip to my talk comment here seem to confirm that these anonymous ips are agents of Tell MAMA who want to conceal their allegiance for the obvious reason.--Flexdream (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tell MAMA. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130625030922/http://politics.co.uk:80/comment-analysis/2013/06/20/comment-centre-right-columnists-are-legitimising-the-edl to http://politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2013/06/20/comment-centre-right-columnists-are-legitimising-the-edl

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]