Talk:En+ Group

Untitled
Why has this been marked as "may not meet the general notability guideline"? Does the Reuters reference not count as a third-party source? Horatio (talk) 05:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment applies to my original version. I see that it has been rewritten in the meantime, and the references removed. Horatio (talk) 12:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on En+ Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130311081343/http://eng.enplus.ru/about/facts/ to http://eng.enplus.ru/about/facts/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Undisclosed paid editing
I have added an undisclosed paid tag to this article because of extensive editing by a UPE sockfarm, please see Sockpuppet investigations/GhostDust for evidence.{{#if:GhostDust| Users relevant to this page include: {{#invoke:String|sub|{{For nowiki|| {{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{Np2|{{{1}}}}},&#32;||}} |GhostDust|IVotedWarren|||||||||||||||||}}}|1|-8}}|}} The article will need a thorough review ensuring notability, due weight, neutral language, and use of reliable sources before the tag is removed. MarioGom (talk) 21:35, 17 April 2022 (UTC)