User talk:Barrypyatt

Due to past removal action (2007/8) on grounds that are now irrelevant, I have deleted this article. Barrypyatt (talk) 07:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Barrypyatt

Barry Pyatt
Due to past removal action (2007/8) on grounds that are now irrelevant, I have deleted this article. Barrypyatt (talk) 07:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Barrypyatt

December 2010
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, as you did to Bognor Regis. 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. Nuttah (talk) 13:14, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Littlehampton. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Nuttah (talk) 13:16, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Chichester, you may be blocked from editing. Nuttah (talk) 13:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Response to Accusations of Vandalism
On December 24th, 2010, I was accused of vandalism by NUTTAH because I executed one edit on each of the following pages: Littlehampton, Chichester, Bognor Regis, and The Lake District. My edits were statements of facts, referring to educational media of which I am am the sole copyright owner; the edits were made with the intention of expanding the page's informative value, because the media in question is exclusive to the geography of the page in question. This appears to have upset NUTTAH, which was certainly not my intention, nor to offend or disrupt any function or other administrative body within Wikipedia.

My media contributions to information publications OUTSIDE OF WIKIPEDIA about the places mentioned, have, in some cases, successfully stood over 25 years of scrutiny, they are all GLOBALLY registered as educational publications.

It is obvious from this that I pre-date WIKIPEDIA by many years in my activities, so I have no commercial need of exposure through its pages.

Maybe it's just me, but I am beginning to detect an ORWELLIAN BIAS to the functioning of WIKIPEDIA, which, I suppose, is inevitable, given the apparently unqualified nature of many of its administrators.

I am too old to engage upon wars of words, or to bother trying to re-instate my contributions, so, this will be my final edit, unless an apology for the unwarranted and true "journalistic vandalism" perpetrated against me is forthcoming. Barrypyatt (talk) 12:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Barrypyatt