Welcome!

Hello, Lobsterthermidor, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Joseph Watson & Sons Ltd, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. 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 {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Ironholds (talk) 01:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Joseph Watson & Sons Ltd requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 01:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Watson's of Leeds requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Siston, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. mono 16:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Twelve Knights of Glamorgan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. --cocomonkilla ^{(talk) (contrib)} 22:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Lobsterthermidor, I have removed your hangon tag from the above article; the references make it a notable subject. However, please don't remove speedy deletion templates from any articles you create; this is often interpreted as vandalism by editors. Thanks, and happy editing, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:57, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lobsterthermidor. The person seems to be depicted here: File:HenryVIIdeathbed.jpg. For more sources, you can check Google Books. Have a good day. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please do not replace the #REDIRECT [[...]] string with the original article's text. I have moved your article to a new title because it did not really conform with our naming conventions. Anyone who looks for "Sir Richard Weston of Sutton Place" will automatically be redirected to the new title, Richard Weston (1465–1541). Regards, De728631 (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your additions here are completely unreferenced, unless they appear in Fletcher's work. As such, I'd suggest you follow WP:BRD and don't keep blindly inserting the material. Ironholds (talk) 12:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 00:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Z7

{{[[Template:I admit my error and understand why I have transgressed. I regret my behaviour. I will not repeat it in future. I have formally withdrawn my legal threat in an e-mail to the person concerned. I believe the block is therefore now no longer necessary, and should be removed. I therefore request its removal. I intend to make positive contributions to Wikipedia in the future, all in accordance with the rules.|I admit my error and understand why I have transgressed. I regret my behaviour. I will not repeat it in future. I have formally withdrawn my legal threat in an e-mail to the person concerned. I believe the block is therefore now no longer necessary, and should be removed. I therefore request its removal. I intend to make positive contributions to Wikipedia in the future, all in accordance with the rules.]]}}

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Accepted, on the proviso that you understand utterly Wikipedia's policy on making legal threats. Request handled by: SGGH ping! Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

I am not holding this for a comment from the blocking administrator, but from the subject of the legal threat to confirm that you have redacted and withdrawn the threat. SGGH ^ping! 12:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The conversation basically went "You hacked my computer, I'm reporting you to the police" "That's a legal threat" "alright, I won't go to the police if you don't hack my computer again". I'll leave it to you to decide if that counts as a withdrawal. Ironholds (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Text of e-mail received from Ironholds 25/5/ 16:31 "On the subject of the legal threat; I've emailed the blocking admin to note that you've revoked it". Sounds like an acceptance to me. My revokation to him was not conditional as he asserts. I simply added, please don't do it again, not if you do it again...then... There is a big difference. It was done in writing, I've never had a conversation with him, the e-mail's there to prove it, if required. I will repeat it here if that helps to clarify my attitude. Dear Ironholds, My legal threat is withdrawn unconditionally, and I apologise for having made it, due to an unfortunate misunderstanding on my part. I have learned my lesson, I now know what the rules are and as I stated, it definitely will not happen again. I am very sorry to have acted in the way I did, I'm new here, no excuse I know. I believe I have got lots of good work to contribute.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 18:44, 25 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yup, sorry - the message I left here was pre-email to you. I've got no problem with (and support) this unblock. I think that Lobsterthermidor has the potential to be an excellent contributor; he just isn't that familiar with our policies. Ironholds (talk) 23:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Gray's Inn Manor requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:55, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The Gray's Inn article looks to be very thorough. But if you have more information, why can you not add it to that article? — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 00:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  The Gray's Inn article is on the Inn of Court - Lobsterthermidor's article is about the ownership of the land itself prior to the Society's purchase, which is distinct.Ironholds (talk) 00:30, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  That is correct. The article you refer to is about the history of the Honourable Society of Gray's Inn, distinguished tenants and later owners of the manor, which necessarily deals in a fairly superficial manner with the early history. There is a thousand years of history to relate before that time - not that I intend to do it all, but certainly the early mediaeval portion. It will dove-tail into that article. The page on Inns of Court gives the entire history only a couple of lines, and is currently swathed in tags, unreferenced etc. Where is the history of the manor to go? I'm sure all agree it should not be suppressed? Do not wiki readers wish to know about these things? I don't see what the issue is.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 00:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

  Seconded; if there are sources, it should have an article, full stop. (Incidentally, I'm planning on writing a big-arse article on the Inns of Court generally. Obviously it will again be a bit superficial, dealing with the Inns as an educational and professional institution only). Ironholds (talk) 01:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  I am grateful for you secondment, but the consensus seems to be that the article is not wanted, so I'm not going to waste my time writing and researching only to have it deleted. Good luck with the Inns of Court article.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 01:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

  Why don't you work on the article in your user space first, and then move it out when it's ready? That way you won't have to fear an incomplete version being deleted while you're working on it. Akerans (talk) 01:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Very good point - wish I had thought of that before. Had pretty much reached the same conclusion myself. Will do so in future.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hello,

At present I can't see any connection between the title of this article and the content in it, but all the same I can see that you are writing about a verifiable historical subject of some interest. Do you intend to add to the article to clarify what it's actually about? If so, I'll leave it alone and let you do so. If not, I'll consider proposing it for deletion because it's not useful to the reader in its current state.

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 13:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please propose for deletion, first half only has been deleted by an Admin. I think the best place for this topic may be within the existing page "Inns of Court", but I note above that Ironholds is planning a new article on this topic, and my hope is that he might give the historical background more prominence. I will therefore leave this subject in his capable hands and move my attention elsewhere. Thanks.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

To be honest, probably not. The Inns of Court as a combined body have so much on them that I can't really include a complete history of the use of each one. It's not going to be an article on all four, so much as one on the Inns as a whole - educational trends, type of members, so on. Ironholds (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]