User talk:MikeeNewton

Your edits to Great Ayton
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.

Keith D (talk) 01:29, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

January 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Prague has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. &mdash;/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 23:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Japan
Hi MikeeNewton,

Thanks for helping with Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. We welcome contributions that help make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia. Here's an invitation to visit WikiProject Japan. There, you can meet other Wikipedians working on articles related to Japan. You'll find lists of new articles, projects, and links to resources such as


 * Manual of Style (Japan-related articles), with decisions the community has made about how to format articles
 * Template:Newest Japan-related articles, where you can list the articles you create so the community can see them
 * Portal:Japan, a collection of resources on Japan

You'll also learn about WikiProject Japan, a template you can place on the talk page of any relevant article, and find instructions for assessing articles.

Hope to see you there!

Best regards, Fg2 (talk) 01:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

'What about Stokesley, then?'
That is the WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS argument. It is not a useful argument for retention of deprecated content, to say that other articles contain it. The cure is not to continue the violations of our guidelines in the Ayrton article, but rather to correct the violation in the Stokesley article. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC)