Julissen
Welcome edit
|
November 2014 edit
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Norman Hartnell may have broken the syntax by modifying 5 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
|---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:31, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Norman Hartnell edit
Hello and thanks for your edits to Norman Hartnell. I just wanted to ask you to consider going back and adding references and cites for all the new additions. The article already has a huge problem with lack of sourcing and cites so it really doesn't need more of the same. It's not that it's not nicely written, but it reads like lots of original essay writing and research rather than recapping published info. Mabalu (talk) 20:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
OK: during the next few days I'll do that. The info had been so changed around , that it took a long time to clarify the history and tone down some dubious additions. I also feel more dates are needed. Is it bad to have original research in Wikipedia ? But I'll get to it !!Julissen (talk) 11:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 6 edit
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Norman Hartnell
- added links pointing to Norman, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, Worth and Reville
- Hardy Amies
- added a link pointing to SOE
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Rayne edit
Hello again, and thank you for your very enthusiastic editing on Rayne (shoe company). Unfortunately, I was asked to take a look at this article by User:Libby norman who was concerned about your additions, and I am afraid that I agree that she had cause for concern. While you are clearly incredibly enthusiastic about your work, Wikipedia is not the place for gushing language and original research/opinions. Libby Norman's article as created is a fine example of how a Wikipedia article should read, with its neutral tone and fully cited statements - every statement she has made is supported by reference to a published reliable source, and the language is neutral in tone. I'm afraid that your additions did not improve the article, and indeed, there was a lot of carelessness - although you did properly correct at least one misspelling that I noticed, you made a number of typos and formatting errors in addition to the non-encyclopaedic language and tone. In particular, you tried to insert a Read More list in the middle of an existing paragraph, which, I'm afraid, effectively created a terrible mess.
Please do not be discouraged by this, as I can see you want to improve these articles, and indeed, there is no reason why you can't do so - we just need you to understand that there is a correct way to add information, and to be more careful about your editing. And you must cite your new additons and claims by noting where you got the information from - which MUST be from reliable published sources. I'm assuming the information you tried to add came from the books you tried to add in your Read More list - I've added the Rayne book to the page. If you are taking information from these books, then PLEASE make a note of this after every single statement you make so that we know where the information was originally published. For example, if you see something on page 20 of "Rayne: Shoes for Stars" and post that information in the article, then you MUST add the following code after the statement:
<ref>{{cite book|last1=Pick|first1=Michael|title=Rayne: Shoes For Stars|page=20|date=2015|publisher=ACC Editions|isbn=1851497935}}</ref>
This will appear in the references as:
Pick, Michael (2015). Rayne: Shoes For Stars. ACC Editions. p. 20. ISBN 1851497935.
Hey presto - you will have supported your statement with a citation to a reliable source! This will enable readers to see where the information was originally published. This ensures that your edits are far less likely to be reverted and to be treated as trustworthy and reliable. Once you get the hang of it, it is really quite straightforward. Please do read up on WP:Citing sources as this is very, very important to understand. Mabalu (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Daphne Guinness article edit
Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Fashion WikiProject, so I was wondering if you might be willing to take a look at some suggestions I made to update the Daphne Guinness page, which is really out of date. I’m not able to propose these changes directly since I have a personal connection to the subject, which I’m given to understand means I have a COI. Thanks in advance. YhSA99b3tTnCnLdr (talk) 19:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)