User talk:Danphilollw

Welcome!
Hello, Danphilollw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Istanbul Atatürk Airport have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

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 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! Jetstreamer $Talk$ 01:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Istanbul Atatürk Airport
I have reverted your edit again. First of all, as I pointed out in my edit summary for the first reversion of your changes, Wikipedia is not a travel guide, and the information you added does not belong in an encyclopedia. Rephrasing: can you please explain why the content you added is encyclopedic? To me, it belongs to Wikivoyage. Furthermore, putting is not a reference. According to WP:VERIFY:

All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material.

We should be in agreement that the ″reference″ in question supports nothing. Please do not reinstate the content before gaining consensus for doing so at the article's talk page. Disregarding my opinion, another editor is also against your changes. Thanks.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 19:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * One more thing. The edit summary for your last change ( suggests that you ellaborated the information you added. This smells to original research to me, something that is forbidden by policy.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 19:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, the edit you made sounds like a travel guide to me. Please take this to the article talk page and get consensus before re-adding. Rzxz1980 (talk) 01:58, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm FreeRangeFrog. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bruno Mars, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. § FreeRangeFrog croak 16:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Understood. Will verify. Thanks.Danphilollw (talk) 16:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)