User talk:Pancakegirl

Your message at Requests for feedback

	Hello Pancakegirl. Replies have been posted to your message at Requests for feedback. Please acknowledge the feedback and ask for additional assistance if you need it. If you do not respond to the feedback, your message and the replies thereto will be archived in a few days. Thank you!
	You can remove this notice at any time - click on this section's [edit] link and remove the section.

Good job. – Novice7 (talk) 10:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Amybinns, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Amybinns/Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Central Lancashire. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Greenbank atrium Preston.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Greenbank atrium Preston.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Broadcast Journalism Training Council

Hi. Just to let you know I've reviewed Broadcast Journalism Training Council for you, and it's pretty good - all I really needed to do was improve the refs a bit (I split the citations into title, author, and publisher tags) and add a category. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:59, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Boing. I'll double check the references so they're right next time. I'm planning another page but it's not done yet. Thanks again apiano (talk) 10:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:UCLan logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UCLan logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Central Lancashire

Hi, I've reviewed Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Central Lancashire and have done a bit of copy editing on it. Basically, I've modified it a bit to make it appear less promotional, emphasising what it is rather than how good it is - for example, I've moved the academic praise away from the lede. Also, I've change the Times bit to actually say that the Times said it, rather than repeat the Times' statement as fact. I've also removed the Independent bit about its good employment record, as that was only talking about a specific class of 35 people in 2004, and it would be giving undue weight to generalise from that. Otherwise, I think it looks fine. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia to promote Amy Bins

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jamie, can you tell me which page you are referring to? apiano (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would be referring to the large batch of edits you just made (now reverted) where you added journal articles written by the same person. We call that reference spamming, and we don't permit it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I accept some of them may be changed, but all of these are based on peer-reviewed research, in some cases in badly under-researched areas. For example, there is very little peer-reviewed research on Ask.fm or Formspring, two sites which were linked to several suicides. At present, the Ask.fm page is, IMHO, largely focused on promoting the changes made by the new owners.

If you wanted to change the writing, okay, but you've simply undone all the work. In the case of the internet troll page, there was a specific request for citations, which I have added.

Telling readers to basically go look at an offsite article [1] is unhelpful. A summary of what the source states should be added to the Wikipedia article. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

You obviously have a conflict of interest in this situation. If you continue to canvass references Amy Binns, your account will be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:51, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I have put in edits on wikipedia several times over the last three years, but I have not run into such controversy before.

I have also requested an edit on the Formspring page, perhaps you could look at it? Also, if you are happy with the second version of the Internet troll edit I put in (which was the original subject of our discussion), then can you please revert it? I don't want to get into a revert war....apiano (talk) 16:58, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. [2] If you start adding references to the same paper all over the place other people may think you have a conflict of interest. I'm going to wait a bit and see what other editors have to say. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou NeilN, I understand. The pages I am most concerned about are the Ask.fm and Formspring pages, but I do think the work is relevant to the social network sites pages, as most research tends to focus on Facebook/Twitter rather than the full range. But I have no more time for this now in any case, so will log on in a few days and see what's happening. Best wishes and thankyou for your courtesy, I appreciated the good faith remark, apiano (talk) 17:17, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Wyndham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Mitchell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:22, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]