Sebastian Macmillan

L. Bruce Archer

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as L. Bruce Archer, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,60-1630654,00.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:L. Bruce Archer. Then you should do one of the following:

• Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:L. Bruce Archer where we can find that note; or
• Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:L. Bruce Archer.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Pascal.Tesson 18:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Sebastian Macmillan. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Robert Macmillan, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
• instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 23:48, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment (IDBE)

The article Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment (IDBE) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline . If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets it on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:04, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.eclipseresearch.co.uk/download/monitoring_evaluation/review_crisp.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Once again, we request that you disclose any and all personal or professional connections to topics that you edit on Wikipedia. If you are being paid to edit a topic, then you are required by the terms of use to disclose this information as well. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

IDBE, CRISP, etc

Thanks for the message on my Talk page. We clearly overlapped in various activities in the late 1990s (I also produced some case studies for the CBPP and ITCBP), and have continued with our respective interests in these causes (I remain active as a Constructing Excellence volunteer, for example, and was a contributor to Mark Farmer's review).

I, however, remain sceptical about the wisdom of creating Wikipedia articles for individual university programmes, however laudable their objectives. Wikipedia practice appears happy to create articles about the universities themselves, and occasionally about faculties (I have contributed to the article on The Bartlett at UCL, for example - sometimes these reflect historic mergers of previously separate institutions, of course), but not about individual university departments or schools (and even less so the degree programmes they deliver). Articles about some long-standing university-based research centres also seem to be OK (but even these can be subject to debates about notability - 3-4 years ago, I worked on getting UCL Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis to an appropriate level of nPOV, sourcing, etc). Also, IMHO, university courses are prone to volatility; new courses start up, old ones shut down, or morph into new ones ("authors should strive to write articles that will not quickly become obsolete"); Wikipedia policy (see WP:Schooloutcomes) is that they are "not considered notable unless they have made significant contributions to their field." The establishment of the IDBE is, IMHO, worthy of mention, but achieving the necessary consensus about its 'significant contribution' and permanence would be difficult.

As an active Wikipedian, I have created numerous articles about notable organisations, companies, individuals, projects, etc in architecture, engineering and construction industry, trying to expand the English Wikipedia's coverage of the sector in a continuing effort to make the encyclopedia as complete, neutral, balanced, accurate and reliably sourced as possible. Personally, I think the UK industry change and improvement initiatives (Latham, Egan, Saxon's Be Valuable, Wolstenholme, Farmer, CRISP, etc) are worthy subjects to include, but editors with a sceptical view of collaborative working, modern methods of construction, etc, may not feel the same way, and we have to respect their views (assume good faith), try to reach a consensus, and avoid anything that might be interpreted as soapboxing (see WP:Soap). Hope this helps. Paul W (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)