" 
 ==Unsourced material== 
 Thankyou for Informing me,Can you give me a link to the page which allows Writing sourceless material in articles    

 :Many  editors  find  this one, and this one very  helpful.   
 ::thankyou i'll try to avoid mistakes  —Preceding unsigned comment added by   •    

 == AIV == 
 Thank you for your report, however, the IP you reported has not committed enough vandalism for us to know if he is not becoming a reformed vandal.  
 I'd like to notify you of this discussion, which I've transcluded below. 
 * - On Feckenham;. Evidently a vandalism-only account.    
 :It last edited two days ago. Also, it's an IP, not an account.    
 The vandal hasn't edited in two days and also, the IP only vandalized three times, while five is usually the blocking amount. I  removed your post to reduce clutter from future reports. Thank you, '  
 :It's okay, and enthusiasm is much better than none at all. ) '  
 ::That would be a whole different venue, if you think that they are being used by the same user, this is the proper place to report it. ''''''  

 ==Pattaya== 
 Thank you for your work on Pattaya. I have lived there much of the time for 16 years, and am fairly new to Wikipedia. I agree with you that edits should be restricted some way. So many articles are totally lacking in correct substance, and need cleaning up. I write for magazines, and for Bangkok Post and NationThailand's English newspapers, and will help here as I have time. Best of luck.     

 :Mostly everyone who  contributes to  the Pattaya article, including  the native Thai speakers, does so  in  good faith, but  they   do  not always  differentiate the special constraints of writing for an encyclopedia, from the tone and content on  their local Internet  forums or badly  written tourism  flyers - which  most  of them  are used to. Writing in the dry, almost  boring tones of an encyclopedia does not come easy to those who  have little practice in  writing  academic papers or factual  journalism. As long  as the content is fairly reasonable however, and not  direct  vandalism,  editors who  write for leading  newspapers or who  are published authors, don't  really  mind digging  in  and cleaning  the mess up. Thank you  for your kind support, and do  not  hesitate for an instant to let  me know if any  of my  edits have been inacurate or overzealous.   

 ==LeonigMig== 
 : Hi. Thanks for the tag thing. I contributed to Wikipedia quite a bit about the local history of North Worcestershire when I was looking for a job after graduating. So I went to the local libraries, ordered books out of the archives, photocopied out of copyright stuff and scanned it in- synthesised whole articles. I loved it (then I got a job lol). I'm one of those people who finds  it natural to emulate styles of writing and some of the stuff I wrote was a little bit flowery, in the mode of some of the Victorian and turn of the century local history books- you know the kind of thing- fanciful suggestions and turns of phrase etc. It has its charm. Basically I'm not interesting in contributing to Wikipedia as a certain editor was a bit of a you know what and stamped on me