User talk:Thalwil

Think london
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Think london, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.thinklondon.com/about_us. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Think london
A tag has been placed on Think london, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Think london and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Seneschal's House, Halton
Thank you for your additions to this article, which are very interesting. The problem is that they are uncited to any published source, so who is to know whether or not they are correct? Please add citations to reliable published sources, as is required in Wikipedia; see Verifiability. If reliable sources cannot be provided, your edits may have to be removed as being unverified, and therefore possibly unreliable. Many thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)