Jump to content

User talk:Marksairey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Marksairey, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Mjroots (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paddock Wood

[edit]

Hi, your recent edits have been removed from the Paddock Wood article. Please seeWP:NOTSOAPBOX. Also, local newspapers such as the Courier or KM would be much better sources to report on any developmen if it gains planning permission, or there is significant opposition to the plans reported in these papers. Mjroots (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to your assertion , and having delivered 300 of 1,000 leaflets, many people saying to me that they cannot find any information, even not aware of the building plans.
The local newspaper is devoid of information on this important subject matter, be the person be for, against or ambivalent to it. My website is clearly labelled to give a balance of opinons and is fact driven onth e rpocess and wht residents can do.
For example, the local authority has a website interface for all plannign submissions, this to date has received only 9 comments from Paddock Wood, which is only 0.1%. I would urge Wiki to be part of the drive to increase the number of people contributing by placing information and fact on the process.
I have no problem you taking out my website details, disappointing though that is, but urge you to include some reference. A description of Paddock Wood without mention of the plans to develop 600 homes or increase it by 10% leaves it sadly lacking, in my opinion.
Your website was removed as an external link per WP:ELNO. Wikipedia cannot be used to campaign either for or against the proposed developments (this comes under WP:NOT and WP:NPOV. All we can do is to report on what reliable sources say about the proposed developments, and whether or not approval is given when that happens. As I said earlier, the plans have been mention in the Courier, and this can be used as a reference that the proposal has been made. Once the planning committee of TWBC make their decision, that will be reported and can then be added to the PW article. Mjroots (talk) 08:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've reinserted the sourced criticism of PW as "scumsville", but have removed the link to the actual website, just naming it instead. Can we discuss any further issues on the talk page of the article so that other editors have a chance to comment. Mjroots (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - please note, I've only raised the issue at ANI due to the possibility that other editors may feel that I have a conflict of interest over the above issue. This should not be seen as an accusation that you have been editing in a disruptive manner or that I am wanting to get you blocked. I appreciate that you are an inexperienced editor and I know that it takes a while to learn all the ins and outs of what Wikipedia is, how it works, and what the various policies are. Please feel free to comment at ANI, and please listen to any advice that other editors give you. I'm open to discussion at the article talk page over any proposals on coverage of the three proposed developments. Mjroots (talk) 09:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
Many thanks for the repsonse and no problem with that, and acknowledge my inexperience. The link just goes to a plan page with some "headlines, I canot see the discussion, Can you guide me there?
Related to the topic as I cannot yet access the discussion. I am very happy that the details is seen as fair and balanced, I feel strongly that many people want more information before hand, once it is agreed it ia too late and planning is granted. In fact it would be excelletn if wiki could take a lead in this regard to detail the steps, the preoces and what the peoples rights are, as it is a very confusing, beaurocratic process which greater clrity could be bought to bear.
I've indented your comments because it makes it clearer who said what. The actual thread at ANI is WP:ANI#Paddock Wood (clicking this should take you direct to the thread). Mjroots (talk) 17:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough (November 6)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dane2007 was:
Article requires cleanup due to several errors in the wikilinks. Sections that simply refer to another place should be in "External Links" or "See Also".
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
-- Dane2007 talk 22:31, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Marksairey, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -- Dane2007 talk 22:31, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough. Thanks! NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 06:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough (December 14)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dane was:
This article has a non-encyclopedic tone as noted by NewYorkActuary that requires resolution.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
-- Dane talk 02:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough. Thanks! NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough has been accepted

[edit]
Royal Victoria Hall, Southborough, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-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 may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 19:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Saddleworth Rangers moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Saddleworth Rangers, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:23, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saddleworth Rangers arlfc.png

[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:05, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Saddleworth Rangers arlfc.png

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Saddleworth Rangers arlfc.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saddleworth Rangers has been accepted

[edit]
Saddleworth Rangers, 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. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

CASSIOPEIA(talk) 11:28, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marksairey&oldid=1141098870"