Talk:Coed-y-Brenin

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coed-y-Brenin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081013014000/http://www.mbwales.com/en/content/cms/Centres/Coed_y_Brenin/Coed_y_Brenin.aspx to http://www.mbwales.com/en/content/cms/Centres/Coed_y_Brenin/Coed_y_Brenin.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:57, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Advertorial tone

Morning,

I have come across the report that this article is written like and advertisement. And I am just wondering if there was any indication of why this is the case. As far as I can see, it contains factual information, without any peacocking terms. It simply describes what is there, how it came about, and the pricing. Is it the pricing section which means it can be considered to be an advert-like article?

Thanks ArjunKallikidos76 (talk) 10:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Interesting; i know i removed some stuff that struck me as advertisment-like a while back, but i think i hadn't really noticed the tag (what you call "the report"), so i didn't remove it. I have taken a quick look at the version to which the tag was originally added and, to my mind, it didn't really warrant the tag, nor does the article now. In other words, i think you would be justified in removing it. Be BOLD! Happy days ~ Lindsay^Hello 11:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

In fact, ArjunKallikidos76, after a week, i visited again and have now removed the tags at the top of the page. I didn't see any justification for them. Happy days ~ Lindsay^Hello 10:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC)