Stevenvdveken

May 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Engagement ring. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A commercial website is no replacement for a reference to a published history of the period. Fæ (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

True: A commercial website is generally a less desirable source than a history book—assuming that the history book contains as much information. But Steven's edit was very obviously not vandalism, and it actually added detailed information, such as the name of the individuals and the precise year. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The warning was a standard warning for blanking or removing information. In this case a valid reference was removed with no explanation. The warning does not imply that the website that was added was invalid or valid. My clarification in addition to the standard template was that the edit appeared to intentionally delete a quality reference and replace it with a website link that fails WP:RS as well as WP:ELNO. If you feel strongly, then please go ahead and remove my warning on this page or revert the edit in the main article, I would happily leave it for other interested editors to make a final determination, as I am no expert on the history of engagement rings. Fæ (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)