Talk:LexisNexis/Archives/2021

Challenging bizarre edits by User:Pi314m on 3 December 2020
The edits are so awful it looks like User:Pi314m is trying to deliberately vandalize the article. What is "LexBourne"?! I am going to revert them in a week or so unless I see some good reasons fast. --Coolcaesar (talk) 04:41, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * A comment I have from that edit reads:
 * "Quite a few re-uses of Bourne book. Combined into ONE, plus
 * does that explain the goal of the edit? Pi314m (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Not really. Plus you actually made the references to that cited work harder to use.
 * You're not related to any healthcare providers, are you? The first thing everyone learns in health care is Primum non nocere. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, you still haven't explained what is LexBourne. The burden is on the editor making changes to the longstanding consensus version of the article to explain their edits. --Coolcaesar (talk) 02:18, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I still don't see any explanation. I am going to proceed with reverting User:Pi314m's edits, which appear to be deliberate vandalism of the article. If you've got a grudge against LexisNexis, take it up directly with the company. Vandalizing their article on Wikipedia with garbage edits is a clear violation of WP:NOT and grounds for a permanent block. --Coolcaesar (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)