Talk:Upton Grey

Untitled
Can we have a grown-up discussion about this rather than the absurd put-it-up-take-it-down game of ping-pong that is currently happening? Tell me where your gripe is and I'm sure we can reach an accommodation. My email is hugh[at]chevallier.co.uk

Ta


 * Yes. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a village newsletter. Whilst I'm sure you're proud of the village's community endeavours, what you are adding is not encyclopaedic material. Nuttah (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm not fully aware of where to respond. As you know, I'm new to this lark. If you look, you'll see I have been trying to contact you in various locations...

I can now begin to understand where you're coming from, though the number of pages on wikipedia that contain items more relevant to a social history than an encyclopaedia run into the millions.

Surely one of wikipedia's strengths is its breadth. I have given objective details about important events in the life of a village. Of course such small-scale goings-on would have no place in an encyclopaedia with a finite number of pages. But the beauty of wikipedia is that it can, should and does provide such information.

What possibly got my goat was that you accused me of advertising - and I maintain that I am wholly innocent of that charge.

Look again at what you last removed - I really was trying to tread very cautiously - and ask yourself whether it added to or detracted from the use of the page.

"Encyclopaedic ﻿﻿material"? The first definition of encyclopaedic in my Oxford dictionary is "comprehensive in terms of information". Hughchev (talk) 16:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey ho.
 * You may think that, I really recommend reading Wikipedia's policies - especially WP:V, WP:GNG and WP:NOT. I note that whilst writing this a fourth editor has come to the decision that the material is not encyclopaedic. Nuttah (talk) 16:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I should remind you of what you wrote a few hours ago... I quote verbatim:

"While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion."

There is no intention to advertise or promote, and your later posts seem to acknowledge that, so please: if objective prose is acceptable, might you accept it? It really isn't doing any harm!

Hughchev (talk) 16:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Upton Grey. 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/20101024232035/http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/council/councillors/wardsinfo.htm to http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/council/councillors/wardsinfo.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303183612/http://www.hants.gov.uk/hampshiretreasures/vol02/page321.html to http://www.hants.gov.uk/hampshiretreasures/vol02/page321.html

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) 11:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)