User talk:81.109.165.97

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. -- 16:33, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] GW licensing

Hi. I notice you've been removing some information from Games Workshop and The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game about licensing. Do you have a reasoning behind this? At the moment, your edits look very much like vandalism and are liable to be reverted. Cheers --Pak21 15:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

No not vandalism. Our licensing information has never been made public and most of what is written here is inheritantly not true. Adam is also not pleased about being misquoted.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.165.97 (talk • contribs)
The way to fix it is to change the mistakes not remove it all. Discuss things on the talk page first also. People will just revert otherwise.-Localzuk (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh and just so people know - the people are from GW [1] -Localzuk (talk) 16:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I apologise if the information here is untrue. Please verify this on the GW forum "Bob the Ringwraith" thread and I will happily remove it for you. Grimhelm 21:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, looking back at this, I have decided to remove the misquote. As a Lord of the Rings customer, I respect that the contract between GW and Tolkien Estate has a right to remain confidential. I also respect that Wikipedia needs to be verifiable. It's not that I'm biased in either way, it's just that GW never officially commented on their licence, so Wikipedia cannot give information on it. To leave it here would damage the reputation of GW, Tolkien Estate and Wikipedia as a whole, so it should no longer be here. Adam Troke never officially said it, but he never rejected it either, so even when it is removed from Wikipedia people of the GW forum will still believe it and Adam will unfortunately continue to be misquoted. I didn't invent this story, I heard it from another GW forum member ([2]), and what the article says is "reportedly" and "it is widely believed". Wikipedia never took it as a primary source, therefore, but since it has been denied by what we can only assume is a server for Games Workshop, we have no choice to remove it, oterwise it might be seen as libel. Apologies on behalf of both the GW and the Wikipedia community if it is indeed incorrect.Grimhelm 08:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Byker Grove

Any reason why all the Newcastle references in the article were changed to Liverpool? BNC85 17:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. The Evil Spartan 14:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] August 2007

Thanks for experimenting with the page Star Wars on Wikipedia. Your recent edit appears to have added incorrect information, and has been reverted or removed. All information in the encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable published source. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. AUTiger » talk 14:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)