User talk:24.64.122.45

January 2019
Hello, I'm 331dot. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Deflategate, 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. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Deflategate; 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: 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. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 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.

Deflategate comment
You left the comment: This is not an allegation, he served a 4 game suspension for his actions which therefore with him serving punishment, he acknowledges that he did do something wrong. Allegations have no evidence, there was sufficient amounts of evidence in this case for it to be fact.

From a legal standpoint, which Wikipedia must follow, it's still an allegation. The evidence was never considered by a jury, it was only evaluated by the Commissioner of the NFL. The legal cases were about whether Goodell had the right to impose arbitrary and unreviewed punishment on members of the NFLPA. Various judges ruled both ways on the union rights case, and the appellate court finally ruled that the collective bargaining agreement with the union did grant Goodell exactly that right.

The long and the short, there has been no legal ruling on whether the allegations were true or false. They remain disputed by the principals, and thus remain allegations. Tarl N. ( discuss ) 02:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)