User talk:MatthewDavid41: Difference between revisions

Hi {{ping|MatthewDavid41}}, good work on your recent edits to local villages/towns in South Nottinghamshire! However I ask that you please do not change the main photo for Bingham to the older photo of Market Place, that photo is old and outdated. The current photo of the Buttercross is very recent and a higher quality photo, it also shows off it’s recent restoration works.

Hi {{ping|MatthewDavid41}}, good work on your recent edits to local villages/towns in South Nottinghamshire! However I ask that you please do not change the main photo for Bingham to the older photo of Market Place, that photo is old and outdated. The current photo of the Buttercross is very recent and a higher quality photo, it also shows off it’s recent restoration works.

[[User:NottinghamNinja|NottinghamNinja]] ([[User talk:NottinghamNinja|talk]]) 09:31, 3 July 2025 (GMT)

[[User:NottinghamNinja|NottinghamNinja]] ([[User talk:NottinghamNinja|talk]]) 09:31, 3 July 2025 (GMT)

== Be bold ==

Let me affirm that there is no obligation use an article’s talk page to consult on major changes before making them. [[WP: BEBOLD]] explicitly invites you to do just go ahead.

But in the real world, it is really frustrating to have spent a lot of time developing a substantial edit only for it to be reverted for discussion. So for anything likely to be questioned, it is wiser to outline the plan at the talk page first. That approach is more likely to identify other perspectives and result in a more rounded and [[WP:NPOV]] draft that will be accepted. [[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 23:33, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

== July 2025 ==

== July 2025 ==

Hello, MatthewDavid41!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

---

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

---

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

• Don’t be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
• It’s normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don’t worry if you don’t understand everything at first—it’s fine to edit using common sense.
• If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article’s talk page. Be civil, and don’t restore the edit unless there is consensus.
• Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
• When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
• If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
• Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Cheers! Rockingpotato (talk) 21:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Dukeries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bassetlaw. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It’s OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, —DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MatthewDavid41: Welcome to Wikipedia!! I reviewed your wee article and saw there was an “Ibid” on it. We don’t use these in Wikipedia. It might be worth looking at WP:REFB, which is a wee video tutorial on how to create references. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 12:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Teahouse is a good place to get help. scope_creep^Talk 12:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

I’m usually really good at references. I’ve changed them now. I hope all looks ok!

thanks for your help

Matt MatthewDavid41 (talk) 13:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Carr Bank Park. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the “Submit the draft for review!” button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Peter James (talk) 22:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Peter James. Please can you have a look at the Carr Bank Page and let me know your thoughts?

thank you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 03:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clowne, Derbyshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chesterfield.

(Opt-out instructions.) —DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ca was:

This draft’s references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I don’t think the cited sources does not provide sufficient information about Carr Bank Park. As such, this draft feels more like a disjointed collection of facts rather than a well-fledged article. Try finding sources that discuss this park in detail.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MatthewDavid41! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we’d love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ca talk to me! 15:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It may be an idea to broaden the subject matter here to include the Grade II listed house, Carr Bank (now a hotel) if the park was formed from the grounds of the house. Do you know if it was? Also, the War Memorial and grotto within the park are both Grade II listed, so have some degree of notability, but there probably isn’t sufficient to write much about each so they are better presented in an article on the park. Provide citations to the listings at Historic England for each of these. Hope this helps. Rupples (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you that’s really helpful. I keep going back to the page and adding further information etc MatthewDavid41 (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carr Bank Park, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Lijil (talk) 11:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MatthewDavid41:, good work on your recent edits to local villages/towns in South Nottinghamshire! However I ask that you please do not change the main photo for Bingham to the older photo of Market Place, that photo is old and outdated. The current photo of the Buttercross is very recent and a higher quality photo, it also shows off it’s recent restoration works.
NottinghamNinja (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2025 (GMT)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others’ comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There,

The reason why I deleted them is because I’ve been heavily critisized on this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography?markasread=338271676&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-JMF-20250727231500-Steinsky-20250727212900 MatthewDavid41 (talk) 23:56, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve reinstated all the comments and topics. I don’t have the rights to do it for Milton Keynes please can you do this for me? Thank you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 00:12, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to remove comments that have gather no replies, you can do that. If you want to retract something, you can just add a comment at the end explaining that. But what you cannot do is delete other peoples comments, or comments of yours that others have already replied to. I have already reverted Talk:Milton Keynes, nothing more needs to be done there. MrOllie (talk) 00:17, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I don’t want to cause problems MatthewDavid41 (talk) 00:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear: afaics, nobody is criticising you personally (that”s a good way to get blocked, btw, see WP:NPA). The changes you made were within the rules of BEBOLD. But because you made a substantial change to a significant number of articles in a short time, I considered it appropriate to alert fellow editors. Exactly the same process has been done when other editors have made multiple changes in a short time as it usually (but not always) suggests that there may be an issue. Furthermore, the criticisms, such as they exist, are about rushing in headlong and then getting annoyed or distressed at the push-back. I assume you hadn’t appreciated that the occasional counterpart of BEBOLD is revert and discuss: this is an intrinsic part of the Wikipedia model. (Anybody who hasn’t experienced it just hasn’t been bold enough.) Most bold edits pass without comment but some certainly get referred to the talk page for debate and consensus. Not unoccasionally, the objector conceded. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing to the article Richard Bacon (broadcaster). However, one of Wikipedia’s core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors’ help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Sam Kuru (talk) 14:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your recent edit to Mansfield appears to have added a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia’s notability guideline. Thank you. Jay8g [V•T•E] 19:40, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know I understand where you are coming from. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 17:57, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article Henry James Walker has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails Notability, refs are passing mentions only containing a few words, one being a food manufacturer, the other being a regional business promotion portal, author has a recent history of adding blacklinks to other articles which have been rejected as not blue

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article’s talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. ~2025-39893-76 (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]