User talk:DanielWilson1997

Welcome to Wikipedia!

- Welcome-

adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field every time you edit. Again, welcome, and happy editing! Bramble claw x 19:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply ]

Getting Started

Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image

Getting Help

Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention

Policies and Guidelines

Neutral point of view • Reliable sources
Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research
What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons

Sock puppetry
Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy
External links • Spam • Vandalism
Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community

Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists

Things to do

Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism

Miscellaneous

Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs Talk pages Useful templates • Tools User scripts

Bradford Alhambra

Hello, Daniel.

I have removed the information you added to

Bradford Alhambra

for three reasons:

The most important one is that it is
unsourced
. All information in Wikipedia should be referenced to reliable, independent published sources. It is true that nothing in that article is sourced at present, and if your addition did not have other problems, I might have left it in for the moment; but if/when the article gets rewritten, I cannot see that information surviving for the reasons below.
It is time-bound: it may be true now, at the end of 2010, but will not be in 2011 and was not in 2009 (I guess: I haven't checked, maybe it was true in 2009? but even if so, an article shouldn't have a statement that applies to a particular year without saying so. See
WP:MOS#Chronological items
).
It is a rather random piece of information about the subject, which does not really add to it as an encyclopaedic article. (There is other information in the article which is subject to the same criticism, and if I get time I may do some tidying).

I hope that this experience does not put you off editing Wikipedia: your willingness to improve it is very much appreciated, and that article is crying out for improvement. I you can research the Alhambra, and get some solid, referenced information to add to the article, that would be wonderful. --ColinFine (talk) 23:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Later) OK, I see Billy Pearce has been in it for the last five years. But it is still time bound, even if not in the scale of one year. --ColinFine (talk)}~

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Paul Hudson, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot NG.

Please use
block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism
.

ClueBot NG produces very few

report it here

, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.

The following is the log entry regarding this warning:
talk) 19:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Paul Hudson. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]