User talk:Contribsx

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 21:44, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Grant Shapps
Hello Contribsx, sorry about the delay in getting back to you. I'm quite pleased someone is taking a reasonable approach to getting this page sorted. I'm not sure I can add anything constructive to proceedings at the moment but I will keep an eye on the articles talk page. Thanks for the heads up Fraggle81 (talk) 18:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes of all the political biographies I've worked on, this one has the most edits I think. I'll take the changes very slowly and try to reach consensus. I think everyone recognises that it's been hacked around a fair amount, but it's a poorly constructed article currently. Contribsx (talk) 18:26, 7 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for getting in touch with me and letting me know your plans. And sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I should've got back to you almost a week ago. Yes I'm happy for you to moderate the page. I've just noticed that you've removed a lot of information though which I'm not so sure about. I don't really have the time to get closely involved so I will have to leave it up to other people to discuss the changes. Kookiethebird (talk) 18:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

What is your personal connection with Grant Shapps? 31.51.152.216 (talk) 14:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=584243285 your edit] to Mark Tami may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * After the 2010 General Election Labour Leader Ed Miliband made Tami Pairing Whip.

Speedy deletion nomination of Cllr Les Jones
Hello Contribsx,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Cllr Les Jones for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheLongTone (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cllr Les Jones


A tag has been placed on Cllr Les Jones requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. The Anome (talk) 14:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Notability of Les Jones (politician)
I believe you need to make a clearer case for this article meeting the criteria set out in Wikipedia's notability policy: mere mentions in the press as a candidate for office don't seem to me to qualify these criteria. Please see the notability criteria at WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. -- The Anome (talk) 18:22, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I think that's surprising given that his predecessor as a candidate for this constituency did have a wiki page and unlike this candidate he was not previously elected to anything. People would reasonably want to find some biographical details on this indivudal.Contribsx (talk) 14:21, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Grant Schapps
What was this edit about? --John (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

This is one of the most complex articles on a living person to maintain. It's subject to dozens of edits, often on the same day and always seemingly politically motivated from one side or other. Note the correct surname spelling is Shapps not Schapps Contribsx (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

As a beginner I was a bit perplexed by that too. I can see that other users have re-inserted the paragraphs. Do you believe that they are politically-motivated? If that is the case what can you do about it ? After all the paragraphs were all sourced and appear to be true. --Winkoftheeye (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Are you Grant Shapps or working on his behalf, as alleged in the Guardian article of 21, April, 2015? If not, could you please contact them to clear up the misunderstanding?  They allege that Shapps initially denied the accusation, but after being presented with a list of all 'your' edits, Shapps then refused to comment further.  So please let us and the general public know.  Ganpati23 (talk) 19:45, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Storm over Contribsx in UK media 22 April 2015
Contribsx became the centre of a media storm in the UK 2015 election when the Guardian claimed the contributor had made entries at the behest of the Conservative Party Chairman Grant Chapps, a story he vehemently denied. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32407991 Moszy63 (talk) 12:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Moszy63 (talk) 12:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

- this is a userpage rather than an article. -- Euryalus (talk) 13:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Identity of Contribsx
Hi, Contribsx.

I'm a BBC reporter (details here) https://twitter.com/xtophercook If you'd like to get in touch to explain who you are, my email address is on there... Best, Chris Cook XtophercookBBC (talk) 20:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation block arbitration proposed decision
Hi Contribsx, in the open Sockpuppet investigation block arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply ) 21:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Unblocked
Based on a consensus here:, I've unblocked this account. There is a consensus there, and in the related ArbCom case (linked above) that the block for "abusing multiple accounts" was not justified. While it may look a little tacky to say so right now, I do want to note there were some serious issues with your editing, but they should have been handled through discussion with you first. If you decide to resume editing, I'll elaborate, but if you don't return, there's probably no need. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Contribsx
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Kookiethebird (talk) 02:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)