User talk:BigJezza10

January 2022
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to David Seaman have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: David Seaman was changed by BigJezza10 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.933204 on 2022-01-12T16:07:01+00:00

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to David Seaman. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Wgullyn ( talk ) 15:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Please gain consensus on the talk page before removing large amounts of content. If that was unintentional, it has been restored. Skarmory   (talk •   contribs)  15:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for trying to improve the article David Seaman. However, when an article is already well developed and laid out according to standard conventions, we shouldn't make massive changes to layout and formatting and significant removals of content without a very good reason. Just because an editor prefers a certain "look" to the page isn't generally a good enough reason. Your changes have now been removed by three different editors, and you've been advised by another to seek consensus before making changes again.

For your information, sub-sections should be created as described at MOS:HEAD, not by using bolded capital letters. The references are formatted as they are so that the number in brackets is clickable and links to the details of the cited source in the reference section, which links back to the appropriate place in the article where the reference is used; your method isn't an improvement. The standard layout for footballer pages is set out at WP:FOOTY/Players; it's not set in stone, but the basic order of sections, headings, etc should be pretty much as per that, e.g. club career is conventionally dealt with before international career.

Apart from the layout and formatting, the WP:NPOV policy absolutely requires us to write in a neutral manner about a subject. You've removed significant amounts of content, including the entire style of play section and any mention of "low points" in the subject's career, and your additions appear designed to promote the subject's "high points". It's absolutely fine to introduce content about e.g. his charity work or his podcast, but not at the expense of aspects of his career history that don't suit and not in a promotional manner.

Please don't repeat your mass changes again: continuing to make changes that are undone by other editors is called edit warring, see WP:Edit warring, and it can get an editor blocked.

If you have any questions, please visit the Help desk or the Teahouse, where volunteers will try to help. Or use the talk page of the article, Talk:David Seaman, to suggest what might need doing to improve the article. Thank you for listening, Struway2 (talk) 10:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Promotional editing
I'm sorry, but you must have missed the bit about writing from a neutral, non-promotional point of view. This is an encyclopedia article about Mr Seaman's life and career, which should be written in an encyclopedic tone. Wording like "His warm personality and instantly likeable character make him a sought after and popular guest on shows such as..." and "lends his unique expertise across all media platforms", may be appropriate for his management company's output, but not for an encyclopedia. Lists of names who've been on his podcast add nothing of significant interest. And however worthy the causes, we shouldn't be using this article to promote the charities he and his wife have supported: there's nearly as much prose in the charity work section as there is about Mr Seaman's England career.

I don't know if you've seen the page about conflict of interest on Wikipedia. It's at WP:COI. If you think you may have a conflict of interest with regard to Mr Seaman, whether personal or financial, I'd advise you to have a look at it, and if anything there applies to your editing on this topic, it'd be a good idea to follow that page's advice as to the steps you should take. Again, please visit the Help desk or the Teahouse, where volunteers will try to help. Thank you. Struway2 (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)