User talk:Mrnice66

Buckingham is no longer married to Sarah. Buckingham did not run a campaign on procedural fairness for perpetrators of sexual violence

Reverts

Please discuss your edits at Talk:Jeremy Buckingham. There may be some edits that are acceptable in there (such as the above), but continually removing all referenced negative content from the article en masse will instantly be reverted every single time you do it, ever. If you actually discuss your edits, it is likely that some of your edits will actually stand. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you can edit the article, you can edit the talk page. You can attempt to remove the extremely well-cited sexual assault allegations until the end of time and you will be quickly reverted every single time you do. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The allegations were widely reported in media of all forms both at the time and in basically every story surrounding his resignation. Wikipedia gives Buckingham's side of the story because of our neutrality policy, but there is no universe in which it's going to be removed simply because he denies it. You are wasting your time and everybody else's because it will never be removed from the article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 01:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Your recent editing history at Jeremy Buckingham shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 08:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Hello, Mrnice66. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest (COI).

One of your edits suggests that you may be the subject of the article Jeremy Buckingham or are pretending to be him.

Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

An exception to editing an article about yourself or someone you know is made if the article contains defamation or a serious error that needs to be corrected quickly. If you do make such an edit, follow it up with an email to WP:OTRS, Wikipedia's volunteer response team, or ask for help on WP:BLPN, our noticeboard for articles about living persons, or the talk page of the article in question. --Find bruce (talk) 21:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New information and references

The new content I have been contributing is referenced and to remove it all carte blanche is inappropriate. If there is content that others deem to be important add that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrnice66 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, file:///C:/Users/JeremyBuckingham/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/Web_FS_Public_Art_2015%20(4).pdf and someones blog are not reliable sources. Praxidicae (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]