User talk:JasonWesCrusherLind

December 2016

Hello, I'm 331dot. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Financial engineering, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Also, if you are Jason Lind, you should not directly post information about yourself within articles as it is a conflict of interest. Please suggest the changes you want to make on the article talk page(click 'Talk' at the top of the article). That said, you will need an independent reliable source that supports the information you are claiming, your word is not sufficient. 331dot (talk) 17:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and respect your objection. Will the contact information of the President of NAESC at the time who was there be sufficient?— Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonWesCrusherLind (talk • contribs)

I've moved your post here, to keep the discussion in one location. Please reply here, I am watching this page, but if you do need to post to my(or any) talk page, please do so at the bottom. As I indicated, the information you want to put needs to have a citation to an independent reliable source that is verifiable(an important principle of Wikipedia]]. Even if contact information for someone was acceptable(I don't think it is) I don't believe that the person you speak of wants to be contacted by thousands of Wikipedia users to verify the information. It needs to have been published somewhere independent of you or any organizations involved. 331dot (talk) 17:50, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:Eric-Wester. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that disputes about article content should first attempt to be resolved on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at National Association of Engineering Student Councils shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 331dot (talk) 18:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, comments like "Play along with me"[1] start to call into question whether you're here for good-faith, constructive editing. —C.Fred (talk) 18:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Acroterion (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Based on grandiose commentary like this [2] I'm inclined to block you indefinitely as someone disinterested in collaboration with other editors to build an encyclopedia. For now I'm leaving it at 48 hours, but if the pattern continues you can expect to be indefinitely blocked. Acroterion (talk) 18:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of National Association of Engineering Student Councils

A tag has been placed on National Association of Engineering Student Councils requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G3; see page history

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 18:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]