User talk:2A02:C7F:94A8:200:E079:2B78:73F:9AC3

Edit warring at Curtis Woodhouse
Hello. I'm about to undo your addition at Curtis Woodhouse, and thought I ought to explain why.

The lead of this article's already very long, and padding it out with unencyclopedic wording copypasted from the sources doesn't seem to me a good way to try and improve it. That content already appears, with some context, in an appropriate part of the body of the article. In my opinion, and presumably in that of the other editor who removed it twice yesterday evening, duplicating such content using sensationalist language in the lead gives it undue weight and isn't what the lead section of a biography of a living person should be doing.

You're probably unaware of edit warring, which is back-and-forth changing of a page to try and make it how we want it to be. There's a rule called the three revert rule, which says that an editor making the same changes more than 3 times in 24 hours can end up blocked.

I'd strongly advise you have a read about biographies of living persons, and if you still want to continue, start a discussion at the talk page of the Curtis Woodhouse article, explaining why you think that specific content needs to be in the lead section as well as in the body of the article.

Please don't add it back again until and unless it's been discussed. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)