Editoraust

Recent edit to Normanhurst Boys High School

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Normanhurst Boys' High School. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Griffin1110 (talk) 11:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Your most recent edit to Normanhurst Boys High School was reverted as it contained language in a promotional style. You are welcome to reword your edit, but please remember that content on Wikipedia must be independent, and free from bias. Thank you! Griffin1110 (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Recent edit to John Moule

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, John Moule, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed 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. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 10:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Normanhurst Boys High School; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Promotional language is against policy. Offices such as deputy principal are not sufficiently notable to be included in the infobox per established consensus for schools. Notable alumni must have their own WP articles to be sufficiently notable for inclusion in school articles. MB 14:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Normanhurst Boys' High School, you may be blocked from editing. Tacyarg (talk) 13:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Tacyarg (talk) 12:01, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

May 2019

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.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Editoraust, you've not gotten off to a good start here. Can we try to fix that? I think I reverted you once in this kerfuffle, and if you had continued unchecked I certainly would have again. Most new editors come here with misconceptions. It's not uncommon. Wikipedia looks a lot like social media. It's not. It may seem like the encyclopedia article about your school is the school's page on Wikipedia. It's not.

This is what an encyclopedia article is. By definition, encyclopedias are a tertiary source. That means the content of an encyclopedia article should come from reliable secondary sources. All editors do here is paraphrase and summarize what others have written. We don't "spin" it. We report. We don't use phrasing to make the subject sound better (or worse). We report on what the sources say. Nothing more, nothing less. If the sources disagree (even if only by degree), we discuss until a consensus is formed. It probably seemed like everyone was against you. That's because they were. Your changes were not accurate paraphrases of the sources. You were spinning it, using empty words to make it sound better. Frankly, that's kinda strange, because this school is pretty damned impressive without any spin at all. There are some things we've decided long ago that we do not include in school articles. You'll certainly find some that have those things included, but those instances are either as of yet undetected, or for some reason a consensus was formed to disregard the guidelines for that particular thing on that particular article for some particular reason that made the encyclopedia better overall.

Most importantly, if you would have simply followed one of our most important policies, assume good faith, we'd probably not be doing this. Wikipedia isn't what you thought it was. People you thought were your enemy aren't (although you pushed it so far, we may look even more like your enemies now since you're blocked - we're not.)

Please let me help you start over. You are entitled to request an unblock. Since it's only two days, please don't. Instead, take the time to learn what Wikipedia actually is. I'm going to give you a reading list. Please try to help yourself here. I'm offering you a helping hand and I'm happy to do it. Too many good editors with great potential get flushed down the crapper because we don't have a good method of intervention when it's clear that their misconceptions are in control. Myself and MPS1992 are from the states; MB and Tacyarg are from Great Britain. There are no biases in play here. That reading list will follow. You cannot post anywhere but here, so if you have questions, just ping me. You do that by adding {{u|John from Idegon}} to a message you sign by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. I want to help, it's a holiday weekend here and the one every year I don't have my son. I'm all yours.

Things you really should read:

• WP:5P - The five pillars. The basic rules of Wikipedia, one of which is Ignore all rules. Please pay close attention to WP:NPOV and WP:NOT, as these are the policies your edits violated.
• WP:BRD - an essay that describes the workflow of the process of disputed changes. If you'd have followed it, you wouldn't have gotten blocked for edit warring.
• WP:SCH/AG - school article guidelines, which discuss what we do and do not discuss in school articles.

I hope you take me up on my offer of help, but even if you don't want my advice, I hope you'll read the above and ask questions at the Teahouse when your block is lifted. We were all new once, and once you realize that Wikipedia isn't what you thought it was, it's really a steep learning curve to gain proficiency. I've been at this 8 years, and I'm still learning. One last thing: everyone that works on the content for Wikipedia is a volunteer just like you. Pretty crazy, eh? John from Idegon (talk) 04:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC) , co-coordinator, Wikiproject Schools