User talk:N.E.Knight
June 2008[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Lending library has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Faradayplank (talk) 16:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
The material you've added to this article reads as original research. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. You also managed to break the article by incorrectly using the citation tags. I've fixed this, for a second time: you broke the article earlier by doing the same so if you could look at what your fellow editors are doing then you'll be able to avoid the same errors again. I'll look over the article more thoroughly in the next few days and strip the original research out where possible. Other editors may also now come to the article to assist now that the {{Original Research}} tag has been added. ColdmachineTalk 08:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Lending library redux[edit]
The edits you've been making to this page are beyond the scope of the article: you've been including content about circulation libraries which ought to go in the Public library article, and about subscription libraries which ought to go in the subscription library article. In essence you are adding content to this article which is duplicated elsewhere, and the article - which was once a clear and concise stub - is now looking more like a general article on libraries as a whole. You need to slow down a little here! I'm also concerned there's a risk of original research in much of your contributions but I'll leave that for other editors to discuss. In the meantime I'm going to start tagging the article with merge proposals so that content can be put where it ought to go. ColdmachineTalk 07:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)