User talk:Ebaums99

July 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Occupy Ottawa, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Major changes like that require a discussion, and consensus, on the talk page of the article before being done. Thomas.W   talk to me  14:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Occupy Ottawa
Hello. I reverted your latest edits to Occupy Ottawa too since what you wrote is not supported by the reference/source you listed (the passing mention of Occupy Ottawa in the article refers to a different case, not the 26 yr old). It also has nothing whatsoever to do with Occupy Ottawa as such, and thus doesn't belong in the article. (And in case you wonder I have no connection to Occupy Ottawa, or anything else in Canada, I just help keeping Wikipedia clean and properly sourced). Thomas.W  talk to me  16:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC) The reference is highly relevant. This is the exact sexual assault mentioned in previous articles. It has just taken this long to go through the court system i know because I was on site during the time

July 2013
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Occupy Ottawa, you may be blocked from editing. The source you provided does not support the claims you made. Adding it to the article once could be seen as an honest mistake, but doing it twice in spite of being told that it's not in the source is not. Especially not in combination with the section blanking that preceded it. Thomas.W  talk to me  18:00, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine I will leave the article alone. It's a mess and full of bias.  I was on site and know what actually happened.  Reread the article.  It's full of unsourced opinion and uncited sources.  You clean it up then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebaums99 (talk • contribs) 13 July 2013, 18:18 (UTC)
 * Doing some clean up on the article is fine, as long as it's done by the rules. But deleting large sections of sourced text and then repeatedly trying to connect Occupy Ottawa with criminal activities, with a source/reference that doesn't support what you write, is not according to the rules. Thomas.W   talk to me  18:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)