User talk:TomiG

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!Kukini 16:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Thanks for the welcome! Great to feel part of this thing.  Cheers!  TomiG 17:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

if you have a problem with content on the Goole page, please do not blank it out. This is not a satisfactory resolution Please do not remove content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 62.69.123.228 18:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hang on... someone else has picked up on this as well as me, all I'm doing is reverting back to the impartial version. I understand you're upset about the decision by the ERYC to allow the Centreport development, there's a better place to debate this than here. TomiG 18:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

The objection lodged by the residents was in relation to the WAY the development was to be implemented. It was NOT for the development itself. The objection letters are available at the council offices and are public documents. Please do not mis quote or mis interpret. Let's move on to the next subject, we do not wish to discuss this here either.


 * All you're doing is making it a one-sided argument. As the other user mentioned on the Goole Talk page, things have to be balanced.  Surely if you're having 'the truth', you should have the lies too?  (Love the way both websites are registered to the same address, by the way)


 * I admit, I wasn't aware of any movement against the development in any form, and this hasn't been covered in the local press, to my knowledge.


 * Just so you know, the only interpretation I get from your site is that you're against this development, in one form or another. My intention is to fit it into the article as best I can, this is why I insist on changing the links. TomiG 14:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest you find an admin to sanction the individual unless evidence is provided that this is a 'notable' concern, which I certainly can't find on the web & which the other user does not yet appear to have, it just doesn't need to be on the site - I think giving the issue mention in the text is more than enough.Bridesmill 17:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)