User talk:Berknyc81

May 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. JNW (talk) 00:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. JNW (talk) 00:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with; or schools you may be dissatisfied with ;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Toddst1 (talk) 11:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read Tendentious editing. Toddst1 (talk) 14:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

June 2009
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 08:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to appeal this. I believe the fact that bernard madoff is included in the notable alumni section even though he did not graduate is another example of the so-called tendentious editing. Why is this ok for another user to post this?

Also, I made edits to New York law school's page that were apparently acceptable. These changes reflected the fact that the dean of that law school questioned the school's integrity in charging inflated tuition. In fact, he was quoted in a nationally recognized law journal.

I want to argue that historical data on a school's tuition increases that is documented through credible sources belongs in it's "history" section. I would like for another editor to review my arguments.

Thank you.Berknyc81 (talk) 22:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic material in article
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Law school. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --S. Rich (talk) 23:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Please use WP:BRD instead of making these unsupported edits. Unless you can justify them as being non-tangential to the overall subject of the article, they will be deleted. --S. Rich (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the recent ABA edit. It is the sort of edit which WP likes -- on point, related to the main article.  Please note, however, that I've tagged it as dead.  (I got a "not found" message.)  The tag is a signal to you or other editors to fix.  If it does not get fixed, then the material should be deleted as lacking WP:RS. --S. Rich (talk) 16:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * fixed the link, now links to Law School transparency website. Thank you for working cooperatively with me on this. I am also considering adding a thorough section to "bar examination" page regarding the grading procedures for the bar examinations in various states. As a multimple failer of the California bar, I am interested in how the exam was graded. I find it somewhat ironic that there is virtually no appeal process or oral examination, given the fact the law has an established appeal process in virtually every other area of the law.Berknyc81 (talk) 16:51, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Berknyc81 and welcome to Wikipedia. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. Since you have a user account, you should stick to it. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 18:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, Berknyc, Wikipedia is not a place to WP:RGW--S. Rich (talk) 03:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)02:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Original Research
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to American Bar Association, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. The law.com article does not mention changes to accrediting standards, only possible penalties. Nor does it say there are pending changes because of the lawsuit. Combining the two is WP:OR. I am going to revert.--S. Rich (talk) 01:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * For more information and WP:GUIDELINE see WP:PRIMARY.--S. Rich (talk) 05:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)05:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)05:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Law school
Please, Berknyc, look at WP:TALK. Your personal comments to me on Talk:Law school do nothing to improve the article itself. Other guidelines you should consider are WP:AGF and WP:NPA. My edits improving Law school will have no impact on the business I am associated with. Indeed, I took some of the material recently posted in Law school (specifically, the Campos blog stuff) and added it to the Law school in the United States article. If, as your innuendo suggests, I am seeking to whitewash a topic, why would I add such material? --S. Rich (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back
Welcome back. – S. Rich (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Berknyc81. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! – S. Rich (talk) 21:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries -- no signature
Please don't add the four tildes ~ to your edit summaries. That is Wiki markup computer language that adds your name to talk pages. Your username will show up on the edit history, but the signature will not show up in the summary. Your contributions will look more professional by omitting the tildes. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 20:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. ''Hello Berknyc. When you don't sign the talk page comments a bot comes by and signs for you. But many editors have their watch list preferences set to ignore changes by bots. When that occurs, your unsigned comments don't show up on the watchlist. Please remember to sign so we can read what you've got to say. Thanks.'' – S. Rich (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm Srich32977. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Law school in the United States seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 05:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Law school edits
Berknyc, please don't make the Law school article worse with your recent edits. They are US specific items. Also, you are getting into WP:OR and WP:SYN. Your creditability as a WP editor would benefit by adding the material to the US article and tailoring it in a strict WP:NPOV fashion. Don't be surprised when these recent edits get wiped out because of the editorializing, etc. Thanks. 16:30, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but all of the people you are signing up for IBR need to know that they are signing up for an indenture. As Congress proved in 2005, there is no assurance that the educational loan contract they sign today cannot be modified to their detriment in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berknyc81 (talk • contribs)


 * ?? What do you mean? "...you are signing up..." Not me. – S. Rich (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)