User talk:Mark D Hemmingway

Mark D Hemmingway, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Mark D Hemmingway! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Upper Footage

Thanks for helping keep an eye on the edits! I think we might have a conflict of interest with the editor that is making the changes. I've left them a warning, as they might not have realized that the edits were seen as promotional and as such, unhelpful. If it's not a problem, I'd like to encourage you to keep an eye on the page just so we have a few more people watching it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pleasure, whenever you need help, keep me posted! Mark D Hemmingway (talk) 05:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First Great Western

The paragraph you added was in the wrong place on the page, under "Rolling stock". Elsewhere in the article there is already a section about the company's performance which I think covers the points adequately. Please note also that in Wikipedia we have to take a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV) and cannot use words like "filthy stinking trains" and "disgusting" which are your own opinion. We call this kind of writing "non-encyclopaedic" and it is not allowed. Please keep to neutral statements of fact backed by reliable sources. -- Alarics (talk) 07:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't, I was pasted from something previous. I never noticed that but thanks for pointing it out. Mark D Hemmingway (talk) 08:47, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Norton AntiVirus, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.

You copy & pasted the section "FBI cooperation" into a new section called "Background". In addition, you made some edits to what you copied including adding "which I happen to think sucks". These are not constructive. Makyen (talk) 09:42, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to BBC Radio 1, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. The lead of the article is a summary of the contents of the article. You basically cut & pasted the "2010s" section of this article into the lead. That is disruptive. The lead should provide a balanced summary of what is written in the article. Makyen (talk) 10:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Heart (radio network). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators can block users from editing if they repeatedly vandalize. Thank you.

You once again cut & pasted one section, "Criticisms", into a different section, "Overview", at the top of the article. Each time you have done this an edit/vandalism war has occurred with a group of editors making it appear that deleting your addition is vandalism. By doing this it apparently makes the section you have added look like a legitimate part of the article. I can not demonstrate that this is something you planned, but it happened on all three of the above articles for the portions of the article which you added via a near cut & paste. Makyen (talk) 10:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]