User talk:Billleech

Aerial photo

You don't deserve it, but I have sorted out the licence tagging for the Henly pic. I have one question - why have you squeezed the image? -- RHaworth 06:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Henley-in-Arden

Please don't restore the old version of the Henley-in-Arden page again. It was totally innapropriate for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not an advertising service or tourist brochure (see WP:NOT and WP:NPOV) And it looked like it had been copied word for word from another website, which is in breech of copyright. If you want to add to it then that's fine but make sure it's in encyclopedic style. G-Man * 19:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments about Henley-in-Arden

Hello, I think we all are happy that you are editing articles, but we do expect them to be structured in the ways that experienced wikipedians have drawn up. So, can I gently suggest that you may benefit from looking at the following article: Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements, and for further suggesting that the sections recommended in those guideliens be used for the article. Furthermore, references and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Please could you make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.) The fact that the officials of Henley-in-Arden have approved the wording of their own material on their own website and published material is good, but this is wikipedia, which is not a body with any formal connection with them. So it does especially mean that we cannot use their material word-for-word because of issues of copyright. Using the structures in the guidelines I've already given will help avoid this, and, in fact, will result in a much better encyclopedic entry more in fitting with wikipedia. So, can I encourage you to continue editing, but within the guidelines written for editors and intended to be used for articles on wikipedia. Many thanks, and best wishes. DDStretch (talk) 21:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to me before reinserting the text which has not been approved by the members of Henley-in-Arden. editor@henleynews.co.uk

The "members of Henley-in-Arden" do not control what goes on this website in the manner you suggest they might, and it is wrong of you to suggest that they do. Any further editing of you which makes it into a non-encyclopedic version will be flagged and notified as vandalism. DDStretch (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked you for continual reverting without discussion. When you return please suggest changes to the article on the discussion page and don't simply revert to an 'official version'.--Doc^g 11:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Shakespeareexpress.jpg

The file File:Shakespeareexpress.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]