|
![]() |
Hi Hammerpleasedonthurtem! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Nick Rahall, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. Please make use of the
sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. As was explained to you already, material that is reflected in the text is properly reflected in the lede. Stop removing it on the basis that it is already stated in the text below. Also, as already indicated to you, the refs in the text are sufficient -- they need not be repeated in the lede. Also, please stop deleting material on the basis -- untrue -- that it is "libel", when it is nothing of the sort. Finally, please stop making deletions of this ilk unless you have consensus for the deletions, in the ongoing conversation taking place.
Epeefleche (
talk) 20:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eve Weston is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eve Weston until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Karmasabtich ( talk) 20:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
|
![]() |
Hi Hammerpleasedonthurtem! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Nick Rahall, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. Please make use of the
sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. As was explained to you already, material that is reflected in the text is properly reflected in the lede. Stop removing it on the basis that it is already stated in the text below. Also, as already indicated to you, the refs in the text are sufficient -- they need not be repeated in the lede. Also, please stop deleting material on the basis -- untrue -- that it is "libel", when it is nothing of the sort. Finally, please stop making deletions of this ilk unless you have consensus for the deletions, in the ongoing conversation taking place.
Epeefleche (
talk) 20:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eve Weston is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eve Weston until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Karmasabtich ( talk) 20:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)