User talk:Keith D
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Keith D is currently away on a vacation until Sunday 22nd June and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Welcome!
Hello, Keith D, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Alex (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 Archives |
| /Archive 1, /Archive 2, /Archive 3, /Archive 4, /Archive 5 |
[edit] Cottingham
not sure why you deleted facts from the 2001 census on the article on Cottingham. These are directly relevant because they challenge a common myth about the place and correct previous data on the article. You state 'our policy' - I contend that your redo edits were wrong and you are just removing the information as a way of childishly winning the edit. I suggest that this relevent information stays on the article and you focus on adding detail that improves the article rather than engaging such repetitive redos for your own spurious reasons. 82.29.114.179 (talk) 23:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I removed them because they are POV as per my comment on your talk page. By selecting 2 instances of counter claims form the many claims which all claim on a different basis you are not comparing like for like. The wikilinked article gives details of the claims of each candidate and as the claims are dealt with there there is no nead to have a POV statement in the article. Keith D (talk) 23:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I beleave you think you are right. Imagine if you put the same effort into improving the article with new information as such a pedantic edit? 82.29.114.179 (talk) 08:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Goal posts
Hi Keith, real life intervened for a couple of days. As for the KOH article, the goal posts seem to be speeding along the motorway. I think, maybe put a copy in a sandbox, wait a while and have another try at revising it with fresh eyes later on.--Harkey (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
