User talk:Sportsfan123456789

December 2012

I've reverted much of your editing, again, because it's either improperly sourced, untrue, or contrary to Wikipedia guidelines. For instance, we don't include names of non-notable staff or students. Rather than continuing to revert inappropriate edits, I'll request page protection and seek further administrative assistance re: your edits, if need be. Thanks, 99.153.143.227 (talk) 00:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 99.153.143.227 (talk) 00:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. 99.153.143.227 (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback

The person who keeps reverting your edits is 99.153.143.227, an IP address from Waterbury, CN. If you think this will turn into an edit war, you could try to reason with the IP address on their talk page, or on the article's talk page. You could also try to get the page protected to stop any edit warring and then try again at another time

Ryan shell (talk) 01:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re this request for feedback [1], I've explained the issues. The first is, as expected, WP:COI. Wikipedia guidelines are clear regarding the addition of lists of non-notable staff: they don't belong. As well, you've persisted in adding content which was not supported by published sources, WP:OR, including the characterization of an incident as a race war. Additionally, you removed text multiple times without explanation. Taken in total, though your intent may have been constructive, the results were not [2]. Please do read Wikipedia guidelines before attempting major changes in an article. Ryan shell, I've already requested page protection and reported this user. Thanks, 99.153.143.227 (talk) 01:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The best advice i can give you about about reporting the race-related issues at the school would be to have all your references in order before going in and editing. It looks like user:Drmies has been working on making the article less ad-like, so you could see if he is interested in coordinating. Also, if you feel for any reason that someone is preventing you from talking about the racial tensions because of their controversial nature, you should report it to the talk page at WP:WAC and you may get more help in that regard. goodluck! Ryan shell (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan shell, nobody is trying to suppress properly sourced content. The user was adding original research. What I'd appreciate is not further fueling this account to believe that somehow I'm cramping their style, or subverting policy and process. I contacted an administrator, Drmies, who has generously helped copy edit the article. 99.153.143.227 (talk) 03:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, Drmies went further than I did: [3]. That isn't censorship, but an acknowledgment that passing news items often don't merit inclusion in an encyclopedic entry. 99.153.143.227 (talk) 03:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]