User talk:Canyouhandlethetruthyet
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Miami Seaquarium. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Donald Albury 11:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
October 2011
[edit] Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:SeaWorld for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. McDoobAU93 11:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Greetings ... I wanted to let you know that your recent edits in both the article and talk pages for SeaWorld have either been undone or are inappropriate for this venue. I can understand how passionate you may feel about the subject of marine mammals in captivity, but an encyclopedia article is not the place to promote your beliefs. When you add information to the article, it should include reliable and verifiable independent sources that other editors can use to make sure what's been added in the article is backed up by the source, no matter how right you think it is (or how right it may actually be).
Second, the talk pages for articles are meant to discuss how to improve the article. They are not forums for the discussion of the article's topics. So offering "your take" on the SeaWorld talk page wasn't very appropriate.
Now, all that said, there is plenty of research out there regarding this subject, which is why it's included in the article. White-washing it away would make the article non-neutral, as would overpowering the article with discussion just of the practice of keeping marine mammals.
If you have any questions or comments, you may leave them here or on my talk page. However, a friendly warning: you have been warned a couple of times for your edits. Any more and you risk having your editing privileges blocked, and since I believe you are capable of adding to the project constructively, I don't want that to happen. Thank you for your time.
Thank you very much for bringing this to my attention, as I was not aware I was in violation of Wikipedia's terms of service. I have posted on the talk page as you requested. Kind regards.
Canyouhandlethetruthyet (talk) 06:02, 8 October 2011 (UTC) --McDoobAU93 11:25, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- First of all, thank you for providing sources for your most recent edit to SeaWorld. However, there's still an issue that needs to be resolved. I'm opening up a discussion on the talk page where you first posted, and would like you to provide some information there to make sure this information is added properly. Thanks. --McDoobAU93 16:44, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
The article Global Conservation Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No indication of notability
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mean as custard (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2012 (UTC)