March 2011 edit

 

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to King's College School, Cambridge, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.

I checked the reference cited by the previous poster, and it does appear that there is a geniune controvesey at the school. It may be that they are giving undue weight to it with such a lengthy section. A better move than simply deleting everything (including some wiki formatting at the bottom of the article) would be to condense the section into a bald statement of the facts. SeaphotoTalk 21:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your recent edits edit

  Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button   located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

King's College School, Cambridge edit

I've have requested comments from other Wikipedia users concerning the edits to King's College School, Cambridge. You know I agree with your editing, feeling that the undue weight of the inspection incident unbalances the article. I would ask that you do use the word vandalism in the edit summaries, since what Kitty is doing, though tenacious, biased and non-neutral, doesn't fall into the Wikipedia of Vandalism - see WP:NOTVAND for more information. Editors looking at this might concentrate on that instead of the real issues with the article. I know it is frustrating, but sometimes the process takes time to work. Cordially, SeaphotoTalk 00:15, 2 April 2011 (UTC)Reply