User talk:216.87.207.12

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 04:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

January 2015
Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Binge drinking seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 21:08, 11 January 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.

February 2015
Hello, I'm Gilliam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Burlington Railroad Strike of 1888 because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! – Gilliam (talk) 14:32, 11 February 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.

January 2016
Hello, I'm Boomer Vial. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Larry Bird, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. Boomer VialHolla 18:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

July 2016
Hello, I'm Julietdeltalima. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Susquehanna University, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. Julietdeltalima  (talk)  18:26, 7 July 2016 (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.

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Dynamic equilibrium, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:44, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

September 2016
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment&#32;with the page Cutoff frequency. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead, as someone could see your test before you revert it. Thank you. SpinningSpark 16:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hairhorn (talk) 02:00, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Dresden Green Diamond, you may be blocked from editing. Donner60 (talk) 05:12, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Susquehanna University. Materialscientist (talk) 09:18, 20 October 2016 (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.

April 2018
Hello, I'm ToBeFree. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Tom Bailey (author), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

September 2020
Hello, I'm Andrew nyr. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Nutley, New Jersey, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 19:18, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

October 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Naturama (Futurama), you may be blocked from editing. Was the note unclear? DonIago (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Heterodox Academy entry
First, I want to retract the loaded language that I used to describe my last edit: "the previous editor's comment is either willfully ignorant or disingenuous." I should have been more temperate, but the erasure of my comments, along with the cited sources--not once but twice--was surprising. It struck me (rightly or wrongly) as tendentious, a form of censorship.

I am not a member of Heterodox Academy. I am an academic who has seen first-hand the chilling of student speech on campus, and there are plenty of well-conducted studies that support my impression. I cited those studies. When Zack Beauchamp contends that "there is a lack of data to support" Heterodox Academy's argument about the limitations of free speech on campus, it is important to note that he is factually incorrect--the data are plain. Politically I am progressive; I agree, for instance, that Newsmax is not a reliable source! But the facts are on my side here.
 * Did you mean to post this on Talk:Heterodox Academy? Either way, the issue is that you can't simply use your own interpretation and original research to argue that someone is wrong on a Wikipedia article.  If you want to argue that Heterodox Academy's argument is right, you need to use sources that talk about Heterodox Academy to say so; you can't say "well, I personally feel that these surveys support Heterodox Academy's argument, so I'm going to put them here."  You need a source making that connection specifically.  And, beyond that, the sources you cited were mostly unusable regardless - we cannot cite Heterodox Academy itself to "prove" that they are right; they're not a reliable source themselves.  Neither of the non-Heterodox Academy sources mention Heterodox Academy; on top of that, neither support your argument that there is a "chilling effect" - they are merely opinion surveys sent to students, so even in an article where they were on-topic they could not be used for anything but a precise, carefully-worded "X% of students responded with Y."  We can't perform interpretation and analysis ourselves - that's WP:OR / WP:SYNTH.  In order to say "there was a chilling effect", you need a reliable source other than Heterodox Academy saying so unambiguously; and, again, in order to say "this proves Heterodox Academy is correct" you need another source stating that unambiguously. --Aquillion (talk) 02:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

April 2022
Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia, and articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to Southeast Africa. 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. NYBrook098 (talk) 03:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2023
Hello, I'm The person who loves reading. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Susquehanna University, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. The person who loves reading (talk) 14:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

school motto
We noticed you're making contributions on an article about which you seem both knowledgeable and passionate. Thanks for helping! A friendly suggestion: approach your addition to the encyclopedia as though it were an important school assignment worthy of your precious time. Gather your sources, scribble a draft, let someone suggest edits, write it all down, tidy it all up, make sure it's sourced (make dam'd sure it's sourced) and the changes you're attempting will likely find a way into the article, given both factual and appropriately sourced. Saintstephen000 (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2023 (UTC)