User talk:World Wide Source Book

May 2016
This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, as you did at Dylan Patton, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Grossly misleading edit summaries are inappropriate as well. Julietdeltalima   (talk)  23:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

WP:BLP/N
Please understand that while your edit summary suggests facially that you may have been acting in good faith, your photograph replacement with something filenamed "flygirls", multiple spam links to iMDB (which Wikipedia does not consider a reliable source), and removal of content that, however unfavorable to the article subject it might be viewed, is supported by references to reliable sources, suggest to the contrary (particularly when coupled with your username, which sounds like that of a commercial enterprise). Moreover, if you are in fact the article subject's mother, you have an axiomatic conflict of interest with respect to any editing of this article, and the edits did, indeed, introduce a non-neutral point of view (as only one example, encyclopedic style does not countenance the public-relations-agency-type use of an article subject's first name on repeated mentions, as per MOS:SURNAME). I suggest that if you are genuinely concerned regarding some actual untruth in this article, you pursue a report at the Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard, where experienced editors and administrators will review the issues and act in accordance with Wikipedia's policies and procedures. Julietdeltalima  (talk)  23:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)