User talk:Kennelliver

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:Kennelliver/sandbox (December 23)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 13:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Southease, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Charles (talk) 19:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

i have cited a Sussex Police reference confirming the use of the nomenclature C7 for the main road through Southease. Frankly, I'm not worried abut how this information is displayed in the article but I feel that it is very important that a reference to the main North-South road from Lewes to Newhaven on the West side of the river is referred to at some stage as the C7 within the article. Tim (talk) 19:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Southease. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Charles (talk) 21:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

So please tell me how my reference last time was not a relevant source. Thank you. Tim (talk) 06:59, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Most of what you added was unsourced opinion or original research and what was sourced is too trivial to merit inclusion in the lead section.--Charles (talk) 10:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dream227
Hello Kennelliver,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Dream227 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. Meiloorun  (talk) 🍁 20:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)