User talk:Kirstys1209

July 2013

Hello, I'm Add92. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Brian Sherratt (footballer) because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Add92 (talk) 08:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Brian Sherratt (footballer). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Add92 (talk) 08:07, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirstys1209. Unfortunately, tehre are several problems with your editing of the article Brian Sherratt (footballer).

We need reliable sources for editing. Unfortunately, on a web site which anyone can edit, we cannot accept the word of some anonymous person who chooses to create a Wikipedia account that they know best, and we can take their word for it. While a newspaper report is not guaranteed to be correct, it is more reliable than the say-so of some anonymous Wikipedia editor. If you believe that a source cited in a Wikipedia article is unreliable, you need to provide evidence for that.
If you have a connection with a subject you are editing about, you have a conflict of interest. A Wikipedia article needs to be written from a neutral, outside, point of view. You should be very cautious about editing on the subject, and in most circumstances it is better not to do so.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war , which is to say that you have been repeatedly reverting the article to your preferred version, in the face of opposition from other editors. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring says "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right."

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. Editors who persist in edit warring may be blocked from editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious content removed

Hello, Kirsty. Thanks for your message on my talk page, and sorry it has taken me a while to get round to dealing with it. I have posted an answer to your message on my talk page. However, since yo have said that you are only here to deal with that one issue, I thought you might not see the message until it had been removed from my talk apge and put in an archive, so I will repeat my answer here. I have checked the source more carefully than I did before, and I now see that the Guardian journalists did not even say that your father said what the Wikipedia article claims: they merely said that someone had "written in" and claimed that he had said it. That is not by any means a reliable source, so I have removed the claim from the Wikipedia article. We can't accept statements on the basis of a claim from some unknown member of the public in a letter to a newspaper, any more than we can accept statements on the basis of some unknown member of the public posting it to Wikipedia. Thanks for calling this to my attention, and please feel welcome to contact me again if you need more help, either with this incident or with anything else, if you decide to edit Wikipedia again. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]