User talk:Informationdealer
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 08:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Recent edit to International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers[edit]
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see the Help Desk page. Thank you! Jacona (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Tom Mount. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 11:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Importance of reliable sourcing[edit]
When you make contributions to Wikipedia, you need to be basing them on reliable, published sources. "Sitting down with the Board" falls short of those requirements, and that's the principal reason why your edits have been reverted. We are also not willing to accept contributions that are promotional, so sentences like "John Jones and Mark Fowler are tradeshow representative so be on the lookout for all the new up to date material and information! You can also Train with them!"
are not going to last long in an encyclopedia article. You did supply one piece of material that would be judged suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia - the current HQ location in Lake City. For that, we're grateful. I was able to source that to the IANTD website, and if you look at IANTD, you can see how I restored that and created a reference that allows readers to verify that what I wrote was accurate. if you want to add to Wikipedia in future, please try to ensure that whatever you write can be sourced to something reliably published either on paper or online. And please don't include gossip that might be considered harmful to a living person - that will not be tolerated on Wikipedia either. --RexxS (talk) 13:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
- In spite of the above explanation and recommendations from RexxS, you persist in adding exactly the same biased and unreferenced material. Please desist. What you are doing is considered edit warring, and it is not an acceptable way to build an encyclopedia. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:10, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Informationdealer, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure![edit]
|
May 2015[edit]
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. RexxS (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I see you've finally decided to use a talk page to discuss. About time. You wrote on my talk page:
RexxS please stop taking out the edits of IANTD. Shall I post [snip] personal emails to me? Most of this information can be found on the website. Especially that of the new COO. The diving community wonders and they ca. Recieve answers to their questions via this. Why do you block knowledge? It is sourced, I have the evidence to back it up. In regards to ... [BLP violaton cut] ... . I have no problem publishing her emails and emails over the Rapid City offices if that is "source" material. I figured this person deserved privacy on that end of the spectrum as we do not know why she sent these and if apologies actually came from her
How about you stop posting unsourced material on Wikipedia? You've been told now by:
- Materialscientist on 14 May
- JaconaFrere on 14 May
- Melcous on 14 May
- Pbsouthwood on 15 May
that you can't expect unsourced, promotional blurbs to be accepted on Wikipedia. I even took the time to explain to you on 14 May what the problem was and how you might contribute positively and yet you've posted the same gossip EIGHT TIMES in the last four days.
This is an encyclopedia and what you claim to be emails from someone else are not reliable sources. How would anybody know who wrote them? More importantly, if anything you contributed were verifiable, then you could at least take the trouble to say where you got the information from - and where someone could check its veracity. And, no, "sitting down with the Board" is no more a reliable source than saying "I read it somewhere on the internet". I'm part of the diving community and I don't wonder about the internal workings of IANTD at all, and Wikipedia isn't a vehicle for you to promote your version of events to the waiting audience. This encyclopedia is not in the business of "righting great wrongs" and you may not use Wikipedia to publish your unsubstantiated theories about another living person's mental health.
As you seem to be chronically unable to understand the expected behaviour here, I've raised my concerns with your editing at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents #User:Informationdealer. Goodbye. --RexxS (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Block[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Diannaa (talk) 19:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)