User talk:Sjcnug

November 2016

Hello, I'm Dan arndt. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to St. John's College, Nugegoda have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

Hello, I'm Dan arndt. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to St. John's College, Nugegoda seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at St. John's College, Nugegoda. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been undone.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please don't keep adding this material. It's unsourced, it's puffery, and we don't mention students' names. We also don't link to external images. Meters (talk) 07:18, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at St. John's College, Nugegoda. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Meters (talk) 07:21, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedic database of verifiable facts. It is not a forum for promoting non-notable events. Essentially you need to ask yourself whether the information you are adding to an article is significant or notable. In respect to your edits on St John's College, Nugegoda they have been assessed by myself and other editors as being 'puffery' (trying to impart importance of an event which is in fact not significant or notable). As a rule of thumb if the event is not reported in independent verifiable sources, such as the national newspapers, then it is probably not notable and shouldn't be included as it doesn't add anything to the article just your person view. If you are in any doubt there are plenty of experienced editors that are happy to help. Dan arndt (talk) 11:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]