User talk:Belovedaunt

Your edits to the Enderby article

upmystreet.com is not an official source of socio-economic data, the website does actually say this. Information from this site is ancedotal, ergo it is not reliable to verify the claims made in your edit. Perhaps you could supply verifiable claims from Blaby District council? --Speed Air Man 23:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

futhermore, your continual inclusion of non-verifiable claims could construe disruptive editing, I will check with Blaby council regarding the claims made --Speed Air Man 23:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blaby District Council

I think it would be splendid if you could check with them. I am very confident that they will confirm Salts Close to be everything I say it to be.

have checked on upmystreet, the site gains its data from a marketing company and as any marketing company will tell you, their data does not always reflect a true picture, ergo, data from upmystreet is ancedotal. Also, what is your actual source for the Salts close section? --Speed Air Man 23:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Just to add, the information regarding salts close from upmystreet posted here could contstrue copyright infringement, another reason why I removed it --Speed Air Man 23:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your continual vandalism

Hi, please can you stop vandalising the Enderby article with unsourced and copyrighted material, it is not helpful to Wikipedia, an admin has been notified of your actions --Speed Air Man 10:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your incorrect allegation

Speed Air Man - You do not know the area and continually change valid material. You are not qualified to edit this page. Please take this as a warning and moderate your future conduct - Love and Hugs, Beloved Aunt

Your material needs to be properly qualified with a reliable source, at present, no such verification has been provided depsite repeated requests, also, personal attacks (You do not know the area and continually change valid material. You are not qualified to edit this page) go against Wikipedia policy --Speed Air Man 10:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks? I am merely stating a fact that you clearly have no knowledge of the area, therefore my edits are far more accurate. You are new to wikipedia, I am just trying to keep you on the straight and narrow and avoid the temptation to over-edit, which many new editors sucumb to. Forceful Regards, Beloved Aunt

stating that you have local knowledge is not a reason to include unsourced material. There is no way of verifying that you are an expert in the subject. Rather than add unsourced material, you could discuss proposed changes to the article on the relevant talk page. An editwar is not the way to see the revision you want implemented. And stating that "it is a fact that I have no knowledge of the area and are not qualified", yes, I do consider that a personal attack. --Speed Air Man 16:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation etc

Hi, regarding citation, perhaps you may want to read this WP:CITE. If you still feel that the article needs sources add this to the top of the page {{Unreferenced}}. It is much better and stops the article looking messy with small tags all the way through it. Thanks for your heads up, anything I can do to help a fellow newbie, please give me a shout!--Speed Air Man 10:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signing your name

Hi, I took the trouble of fixing your piped link as it wasn't linking to your page. You typed [[User:Beloved Aunt|Beloved Aunt]]. It should be [[User:Belovedaunt|Beloved Aunt]]. The part before the pipe ( this symbol | ) should be the exact spelling of your user page, after the pipe you can type your name as you want it to look. The first version will point to a page that doesn't exist and users may think it is a sock puppet account. It catches you out first time, I know it did with me! thanks and regards --Speed Air Man 10:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Enderby, Leicestershire, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Jeni ^(talk)_(Jenuk1985) 22:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page User talk:Speed Air Man. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shut up you cock pilot. Regards, Belovedaunt (talk) 18:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jeni ^(talk)_(Jenuk1985) 22:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are classy Klunge Jen. Thanks for the fair warnings. Regards,Belovedaunt (talk) 18:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to Leicester Forest East services, you will be blocked from editing. Jeni ^(talk)_(Jenuk1985) 18:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated.Canterbury Tail talk 19:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot be banned or temporarily prevented from pursuing my editing hobby. Your system is flawed and you know it. All the same I will make no further personal attacks as I am a polite person Beloved Aunt II (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beloved Aunt II for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Jeni ^(talk)_(Jenuk1985) 20:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]