User talk:Megv1596

THIS WAS A NEW USER IN FEBRUARY 2018

Please assist Megv Victuallers (talk) 11:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Megv

Looking good x Roshanne96 (talk) 14:15, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Loughborough University

Digital marketing assignment. Do experiment on your user page and in the "sandbox". You can find the link for the sandbox at the top of this page. Remember to sign in at the bottom of the wp:Loughborough University page. Remember that you have guides on "Learn".Here are a few extra links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can alsovisit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Victuallers (talk) 11:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Megv1596. You have new messages at Talk:ASOS.com.
Message added 21:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view, promotional editing, and reverting without explanation

Wikipedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and must not promote anything, whether a belief, a business, a person, or anything else. There is no place in any Wikipedia article for saying that anything is "beneficial" or "increasingly important", because those are value judgements. Some of what you have posted at ASOS.com is pure marketing-speak, and more of it is generally promotional in tone, and it belongs in PR or advertising copy, not in Wikipedia articles. Such text as "In society, organisations that are open to adaptation, and understand the constantly changing environment have a greater opportunity to remain competitive in terms of online marketing" is even worse: not only is it promotional and written in glaring marketing-speak, but it is also not about ASOS.com, so it clearly does not belong in the article. I also see that after another editor had put effort into cleaning up some of the unhelpful changes you had made to the article you reverted his or her changes, without any explanation. Did you read the edit summary to this edit before you reverted it? If so, why do you disagree with it? If you believe you have a good reason for disagreeing you need to explain it, not just post back the same content without explanation. Please take heed of what I have said, because if you continue in the same way sooner or later you will be blocked from editing by an administrator. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]