User talk:Archeditnyc

January 2020
Hello, I'm Dominic035. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Skidmore, Owings & Merrill have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. 22:30, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Dominic035: Could you please explain why you consider these edits not constructive? I have aimed to improve the article by linking each of SOM's notable projects to a high-quality secondary source that demonstrates why it is notable (such as articles in national and international media). If there's a more appropriate way to attribute these sources per Wikipedia standards, please let me know. Thank you.


 * It, at first, looked to me as if you inserted spam links. However, upon further review, I see that the edits you made were, in fact, constructive. I apologize for the confusion. Also, remember to sign your posts using ' ~ '  22:57, 27 January 2020 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for reviewing, Dominic035. I have restored the edits. Archeditnyc (talk) 16:41, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

February 2020
Hi Archeditnyc - I saw your recent edit to SOM and it's much better. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you would like assistance meeting WP's citation policies or in using the citation templates. Best,  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  05:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)