User talk:CurrentUK

Welcome

Hello CurrentUK, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

CurrentUK, good luck, and have fun. – OrangesRyellow (talk) 10:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

Hi CurrentUK. I have worked on articles similar to the ones you just created. Looking forward to working with you. Cheers !!!! OrangesRyellow (talk) 10:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CurrentUK, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi CurrentUK! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse
This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, CurrentUK. You have new messages at OrangesRyellow's talk page.
Message added 11:10, 8 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

OrangesRyellow (talk) 11:10, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rotherham

Please read WP:AGF, and WP:NPA. Editors who make personal attacks on other editors can be blocked from editing. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And, while you're at it, please also read WP:LEADCITE. There is no need to include citations in the opening paragraphs, unless the statements are contentious and so long as the citations are included in the main text. All the citations in the introductory section should really be removed, not added to. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:11, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again... You have clearly not yet read, or implemented, WP:NPA. Please do so, and withdraw your comments on the article talk page. Thank you. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...also, please withdraw this. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"12 year old"

Hi CurrentUKCuz. Please could you explain where you think I may have broken the "rule on Wikipedia against behaving like a 12-year-old supporting his/her clique", if such a rule existed, which you suspect it does not? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:44, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why these respectable users are wasting their time with you. From your past history, you have proven to be, to say bluntly, a downright terrible person. None of these people have anything against you and if they did, they wouldn't last on this project for very long. I suggest you rethink your issues, and try to reshape your outlook. Peace TheGracefulSlick (talk)

Quotes

Hi: Thanks for the addition to Rape in Pakistan. However, I shortened and reworded it quite a bit. For one thing, we try to keep our wording as neutral and factual as possible, because we're an encyclopaedia; when using an emotional source like the Daily Mail, that involves quite a bit of toning down, but the facts and figures speak for themselves. Secondly and more importantly, we don't use long quotes if we can possibly avoid it, and always mark them off very explicitly (either inverted commas or an absolutely clear text device such as the <blockquote> tag). We have to be absolutely scrupulous about copyright - with no "fair use" wiggle room for wording - because everything on Wikipedia is available for reuse by anyone for any purpose, with very limited and specific exceptions for some files. So it isn't like academic publishing or even journalism. See this page and its links for full details, and this page for writing guidelines. In addition, encyclopaedic writing summarises. One reason we have references is so the reader can go look up the full story, or seek information on some aspect we didn't cover. So please, next time, summarise. Thanks! Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Peterborough sex abuse case

Hello,

The above nomination of an article upon which you were a primary editor has been approved for DYK.

Georgejdorner (talk) 16:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Peterborough sex abuse case

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:48, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aylesbury sex gang

Can you please refrain from removing maintenance tags from articles without reason, especially when the required changes have not been made. Users are not required to provide reasons to why they feel as if a certain tag is necessary. When a user associated with the certain tag lands on the page, they will decide for themselves if the article has met the criteria or not. Going by the message you left on my talk page, you seem irritated. I am interested to know why exactly. Thanks. Uamaol (talk) 03:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CurrentUK - This is now under active discussion at the article talk page and your comments would be welcome. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Information icon Hello, I'm OnionRing. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Halifax sex gang, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! OnionRing (talk) 09:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halifax sex gang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 24 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Halifax child sex abuse ring for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Halifax child sex abuse ring is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halifax child sex abuse ring until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]