User talk:Charlesdrakew/Archives/2011/November

Potential edit warring - please be careful
Hi, I just wanted to remind you that it's possible to be an edit war even if you don't violate the three-revert rule. The back-and-forth between you and looks to be heating up, so I want to be sure you understand that the correct thing to do if you disagree with his edits is to discuss them, not continue reverting them. Continuing to revert, even at a slow rate, even if you're positive that you're right, could still get you blocked for edit warring. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:26, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This is blatant POV-pushing by this editor who has done nothing else. If any other editors think this content is worth keeping they are welcome to restore it. Are we going to have sections for investments in the arms industy and whatever else particular people have an aversion to? I think not. As it happens I hate smoking and the tobacco industry but I don't think this sort of detail is encyclopedic.--Charles (talk) 17:32, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

London Councils
Hi Charlesdrakew i am contacting you as requested to ask if you could kindly explain why you keep editing my contributions on london councils. You have informed me that you feel that they lack neutrality. Could you please explain to me why you believe this to be the case. My contributions are from a reliable source, and i express neither mine or anyone elses personal opinion on them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.230.101 (talk) 17:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You seem to have forgotten to log in. Assuming you are Johnwarren1981 I should have taken the time to explain the problem better and for that I apologise. It is true that what you added was factual, sourced and did not overtly express an opinion, but singling out one particular aspect of a council's investment policy for such prominent treatment is not neutral. Wikipedia does not have a view on investment in tabacco or anything else. If you wrote a section on a council's spread of investments without giving undue weight to any particular sector that would be in line with Wikipedia neutrality.--Charles (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Charlesdrakew sorry that was me your right i did forgot to log in. Thank you for explaining about the edits as i did not realise straight away why you changed them. I understand what you mean about singling out that particular investment. I only did so as it was the only one i was aware of when i did the edits. I am new to Wikipedia, and i thin i will probably go through Wikipedias policies more carefully before doing anymore contributions as i am not that confident that i know what i am doing at the moment.

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwarren1981 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good plan and happy editing.--Charles (talk) 06:46, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Well thanks.

Location of photo: File:Buxton St. Ann's pumproom 2.JPG
Hi, Charkesdrakew.

I have just started an article on Buxton Crescent and wanted to include this photo of yours. I don't see how it can fit into the the Pump Room opposite the Crescent building itself, so I wanted to check that it is really is from there and not one of the Bath buildings adjacent to the Crescent on the same side of the road? Thanks. Hallucegenia (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It is definitely Buxton. In spite of having relatives living in Wiltshire I have never visited the Bath crescent, sad to say.--Charles (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

What exactly is the mistake I made from battle of hong kong (talk)
Hey I'm sorry I messed up the first time, and deleted some of the sentence can't deny that. But what was the problem after that? all I wanted was to include my opinion on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by contribs) 00:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)  WarriorsPride6565 (talk)

Oops sorry I forgot to sign my comment (btw please educate on my mistakes) WarriorsPride6565 (talk 8:11, 24 September 2011 (UTC).


 * It was the first time that I rolled back. Your second posting was reverted by another editor. You can see this by clicking the history tab at the top of the talk page and you can contact him if you wish.--Charles (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)