User talk:Royalforrester

Hello, I've removed your comments on the Emma Wilson article as the article itself is not the place to make them. There is current discussion at Articles for deletion/Emma Wilson or you could comment on the 'discussion' page for the article (see tabs at the top). Otherwise, you can always comment on my 'talk' page if you are addressing me particularly.

As for the comments themselves, I am sorry if my work on wikipedia has caused distress (this is not my aim) and assure you that I have no axe to grind. In adding detail to the article I was simply aiming to better show how the subject is notable in the context of the public discussion. My only interest is the subject's notability as an academic (you will notice from the article history that I am not the author of the comment you objected to about Jacqueline Wilson). Halfleft9843759 (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Emma Wilson has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. —  iride  scent  18:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Everything about the Emma Wilson page is unconstructive. The subject has begged for its deletion and this has been denied despite privacy issues. I suppose you're really proud of that with your little sparkly user name?

Thanks for your message on my talk page. As far as I know, the deletion has not been denied, it is still being discussed (See Articles for deletion/Emma Wilson). If you can just take a step back, you'll notice that the issue is being taken seriously and democratic processes are going on. Halfleft9843759 (talk) 22:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)