Talk:Mind (charity)

message: excessive see also links seem a little weasely to me, does there really need to be so many links to Scientology?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.119.217 (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: We should probably write a section for the annual award they give out
List of past winners http://www.mind.org.uk/news-campaigns/mind-media-awards/looking-back-at-the-mind-media-awards/
this years http://www.mind.org.uk/news-campaigns/mind-media-awards/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam Dufus (talk • contribs) 00:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Mind media award

message: An editor reverted a proposed update without an explanation so I reverted the revert. If you would, please explain why you are reverting other editor's updates so that everyone who watches pages can determine if there is a legitimate reason or not for you to remove proposed updates. Thanks! Damotclese (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone once again altered the test without explaining the reasons why. Please use this Talk: page to discuss proposed changes, otherwise other editors will revert your changes. Thanks. Damotclese (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a recent edit by a user who had been adding almost identical changes indiscriminately to multiple articles. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:06, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are you claiming that the text is promotion? Would you please stop making changes without explaining yourself? That is not how we do things on Wikipedia normally. Editors should note why they are making changes so that other editors do not consieder it unwarranted vandalism. Damotclese (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not claiming anything; the original edit added nothing significant to the article and I just felt the article was better without it. I removed an almost-identical paragraph from about 20 other articles; feel free to reinstate those edits if you think the articles would thus be improved . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:25, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

text: When you make changes, (talk) you need to describe why you are making them. This article has a history of vandalism which is why a large number of editors watchlist it. You have a history of making unexplained changes, I see your talk page has informed you of why it is necessary to explain your edits to avoid being reverted as vandalism. As (talk) noted, we don't get paid for our time here and when you waste people's time, they get less inclined to improve Wiki pages. Hopefully that's the end of your behavior. BiologistBabe (talk) 16:53, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  BB, where have you ben? :) Not to worry, I get tired of incompetence but it's not going to drive me off, I watch too many pages associated with the ANF and the Scientology criminal enterprise to revert vandalism to avoid working on pages. And yeah, this page has a history of politically-motivated vandalism, I was asked by the RFC bot years ago to resolve one such argument and for some reason I never unwatched the page. I'm going to unwatch it now. Thanks! Damotclese (talk) 16:59, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All is now becoming clear; I will refrain from editing any pages relating to mental health from now on. Once bitten, twice shy. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explain your edits and reverts, please 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mind (charity). 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/20100216080342/http://www.mindincroydon.org.uk/DocumentStore/AnnualReport0809.pdf to http://www.mindincroydon.org.uk/DocumentStore/AnnualReport0809.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:05, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Would it be helpful to expand the section on Local Mind Charities (into its own section) to talk about the federated structure, the Mind Quality Mark assessment/audit, and local services? Or would it be useful just to cover the federation and affiliation process/fee and then information about the local minds be added as new articles and linked through? uksigma (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would it be helpful to expand the section on Local Mind Charities?