User talk:2601:199:417F:3C70:FCA7:FC39:6700:5225

February 2021
Hi. I'm EGL1234. I wanted to let you know that one of your contributions, specifically this edit, seemed biased, and was almost completely comprised of opinionated information. I'm just letting you know that in future, you should perhaps have a more neutral viewpoint. Thanks :)  EGL 1234 10:59, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  13:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)