User talk:Aghattaura

Welcome!

Hello, Aghattaura, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! EdJohnston (talk) 04:20, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

help me Hi Edward, I have made numerous changes to the Crowe Clark Whitehill pages to make them sound impartial and factual. Please could you confirm if this will remove the warning boxes at the top of the page? If not, what else would need amending? I would be grateful if you could assist.

September 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Help request
The Crowe Clark Whitehill Wikipedia page seems to have reverted to the old version, please could you explain why this is as much of the factual information has been lost? Plese could the latest version be restored and if further editing is required the it can be done to the most current version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aghattaura (talk • contribs) 12:36, 26 September 2011
 * If you click "View history" at the top of the Crowe Clark Whitehill page, you can see what changes have been made, who made them, and (if they used the WP:Edit summary feature, as one should do) the reasons for the changes. Your additions to the article have been reverted by administrator, who left you a warning above on this page: his edit summaries are "Reverting to pre-spam version" and "Removing promotional claim sourced to a "reference" that does not confirm the claim".


 * The way that Wikipedia works is described at WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle: if you think a change will improve the encyclopedia, be BOLD and make it; but if it is then reverted, do not repeat it, which can lead to WP:Edit warring, but discuss it with the other editor(s), and try to reach a WP:Consensus. If you are not able to reach a consensus, there are WP:Dispute resolution processes available.


 * So your next step, if you are unhappy with JamesBWatson's changes, should be to discuss them with him; but bear in mind that Wikipedia requires a neutral point of view and is very resistant to being used for any kind of advertising or promotion. Also, if you are connected with the company, you have from our point of view a WP:Conflict of interest and should read that guideline and WP:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. The WP:FAQ/Organizations may also be helpful. JohnCD (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)