User talk:Ace7007

September 2010

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page James W. Gibson worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. ClamDip (talk) 04:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

James W. Gibson

Please stop adding unsourced content to the James W. Gibson article. If you add content without a source, it is impossible for other users to verify that content. YOU MUST ADD A SOURCE OR YOU WILL BE BLOCKED FROM EDITING. Thank you. – Pee Jay 21:08, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not ignore my messages. You MUST stop adding unsourced content to James W. Gibson or I will report you to the Wikipedia administrators and you may face a temporary (or possibly indefinite) block from editing. – Pee Jay 22:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please confirm how the writing was inappropriate in style? The reference sources were provided and the content was fact. Cannot therefore be inappropriate. Many thanks

Ah, he speaks! At last! I don't have any issue with the facts or with the sources, it's the style of writing that is the problem. In all honesty, the whole article reads like it belongs in a magazine rather than an encyclopaedia, and that's partially down to me and the way I wrote it a few years ago. I do intend to rewrite the piece in the next couple of days, so thank you for providing the impetus for me to knuckle down and do it. By the way, your username, does "Ace" represent your initials? A.C.E.? – Pee Jay 18:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as it's the first time I've used the talk functionality it's something I have to learn as I go along.

With regards to the information, what I added was factual and exact. I don't think the style of it was inappropriate at all. In fact, it contained a majority of facts. I would think if there is no wording to link the facts together then it would just be a series of bullet points!

I would be far happier if the information you input was accurate full, rather than just a one or two line summary of 20 years of hard work and labour.

I'm not sure why you need to know the details of my choice of user name.Ace7007 (talk) 19:05, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because if A.C.E. is your initials, I might have to assume that your name is Alan Embling, grandson of James Gibson. No idea if his middle name begins with a C, but it's not an unreasonable assumption to make. And of course, if you are Alan Embling, then that represents a conflict of interests (see WP:COI) and you really ought to declare your identity. – Pee Jay 21:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not Alan Embling. I have updated the details with just fact now. Hopefully that is now acceptable to you.Ace7007 (talk) 22:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then Andrew Embling, perhaps? Or some other member of the Embling family? It's rather convenient that your writing should resemble so much of the Embling family's work on Gibson and his life. – Pee Jay 16:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noted them down as one of the reference sources. I think that explains your question. I note you have reverted back to the previous incorrect and incomplete version. Any reason why?

September 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page James W. Gibson has been reverted.
Your edit here to James W. Gibson was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://manunitedfans246.weebly.com/home/uniteds-forgotten-saviour) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]