User talk:206.180.44.25

Place of origin: Dayton, Ohio

May 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Reynolds and Reynolds, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Flaco1262 (talk)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your edit on Reynolds and Reynolds
Hi,

Thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia! I understand that you have removed content on the article Reynolds and Reynolds because you believe there exists an consensus that the source quoted Glassdoor is not reliable. I have looked into the talk page of the article, but were unable to find detail supporting your claim. In particular, the article concerned is written by the official team with regard to a survey they themselves carried out and the content cannot be edited by the public and so the discussion at Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_189 does not appear to apply. I would appreciate if you could very kindly provide me a link to where the consensus was made. Otherwise, I am afraid I would have to treat your edit as vandalism.

Thanks, - Andrew Y talk 13:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Re-read what glassdoor says, the paragraph staring "for your perusal". They say "DHL Express ranks as the least favored company on Glassdoor (of those with at least 25 employee reviews)." They're talking about user-submitted reviews already on their site. There was no independent study or survey. 206.180.44.25 (talk) 15:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I believe what they mean in the noticeboard is that you cannot quote content in the contents that are available for public to edit on Glassdoor, which is not the case for the source. I should also note that the line is the article, quoted "A 2008 report by the employer rating site Glassdoor ranked Reynolds and Reynolds the third lowest rated company based on employee satisfaction." is indeed factually correct. It is merely a statement to assist people in judging the employee satisfaction in the company. Whether people regard stats from Glassdoor highly is another question. I cannot see how adding this line constitutes vandalism and as such I will be reverting the edit. I shall also requesting clarification on the noticeboard. Until then, I request that you do not revert my edit until a decision has been made on that regard. - Andrew Y talk 16:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have submitted an enquiry w/r to the issue at Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. While we wait for further advice, I would like to draw your attention to the link that QuiteUnusual provided: . In particular, see page 6, quoted "At the end of 2008, Glassdoor.com published its company ratings based on employee satisfaction. (C.R. 123-29; R.R. 560-65). R & R ranked third worst with a 2.0% overall rating and Brockman had an 8% CEO approval rating. ". It would appear that a lawyer is confident enough to use Glassdoor in a formal legal document. I hope you can agree that Glassdoor can in this context (and in someone's - not necessarily yours - opinion) be a reliable source. Regardless, considering I have submitted the request, I would be more than happy to wait to see if a definite opinion would be provided. All I ask is that, as above, you do not remove the phrase before the conclusion of the matter. Once again, thanks for your contribution! - Andrew Y talk 17:21, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Please see Reliable_sources/Noticeboard - it has been suggested that Glassdoor is a reliable source in this context. I would appreciate if you could refrain from removing the statement in the future. — Andrew Y talk 12:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

August 2015
Hello, I'm FourViolas. Your recent edit to the page Euless, Texas appears to have added incorrect information, so I removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. FourViolas (talk) 18:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You were mentioned at a noticeboard
Please see Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. You can respond there if you wish. This is about recent edits at Reynolds and Reynolds. Your IP seems to be registered to that company so you should be mindful of the provisions of our WP:Conflict of interest guideline.Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015
Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to Glassblowing. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, please use the sandbox instead, where you are given a certain degree of freedom in what you write. Materialscientist (talk) 22:59, 21 August 2015 (UTC)