Talk:Arlington Catholic High School

message: Harsh edit: 15:38, October 26, 2005 69.231.239.67 (Copy editing, removed a lot of fluff)
To get the real feel of the school you need all that fluff...
--David Marcucci 16:19, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: . Despite numerous reversion of your additions by multiple editors, you keep re-adding them without coming here to form a consensus as required by WP:BURDEN, so I've started a discussion for you. Several points:
# You stated you are an employee of the school. First that means you unambiguously have a COI and need to follow best practices.  Second, your edit warring implies you think that you OWN this article. This article does NOT belong to the school. It is NOT for the purpose of disseminating the information the school wants put out. It is NOT to be used to put out information that is promotional or unsourcable to reliable independent sources.
# There are guidelines for school articles. Under them, there are numerous things we do not add to articles, among them links to social media.
# You uploaded a copy of the school's logo to Commons.  I've nominated it for deletion as your statement in an edit summary that you are employed by the school in no way indicates you have the authority to release rights on a piece of the school's intellectual property (which by the way is an extremely bad idea.  It effectively eliminates the school's ability to derive any income from the use of its logo, something virtually all schools do).
If you want your information in the article, you need to convince other editors it belongs by making logical argument here. Said argument should be based in proper sources and informed by policies and guidelines. Thanks. (BTW, everything printed in blue is a link, anywhere on Wikipedia. You should probably read all of the links here and on your talk page prior to responding) John from Idegon (talk) 19:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI edits on 5/1/2017 

message: I went ahead and rewrote much of the material, trying to use a neutral point of view. It turned out to be a copyvio so I had to rewrite it.
, I understand you wish for further information about the school to be portrayed on Wikipedia. Kindly keep in mind that Wikipedia is not an advertisement; information needs to be written neutrally and dispassionately. As a school employee it may be difficult for you to do this, which is why WP:COI restrictions are here. Think: How does Encyclopedia Britannica write about topics? Then how would it look like if Wikipedia did so? What do other school articles look like. Also: While information is factual, not all of it belongs in an encyclopedia some information is unimportant, and some things like school songs (frequently added to school articles) may be copyright violations.
I do think that users like Casemoney don't always mean ill when they edit. They want to add information about their school but they don't know how to do so. Wikipedia does have lots of policies and rules, but ordinary people have a tough time understanding them. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a new editor to understand all of the policies right away. If the edit seems to be in good faith, usually it's better to rewrite than to remove wholesale unless it's a clear copyright violation or defamatory towards a living/recently dead person. Unfortunately the text matches the text on the website and that makes it a copyvio: the only choice is to remove wholesale. Even if Casemoney wrote it himself/herself there's no evidence that he/she has permission to reuse the text! Casemoney, please remember to write in your own words.
I usually go easy on people who write promotional sounding content for schools: Imagine a person editing Wikipedia for the first time sees his edits wiped away wholesale and dismissed; it's going to make him or her not happy (even if their edits weren't very good), and Wikipedia's image is damaged among ordinary people if their edits are removed like that, even if their edits weren't very good or were way way too promotional and/or contain unencyclopedic material. If an inexperienced user is blocked for COI, it's going to give him/her a grudge against Wikipedia even if his/her edit was not good. Now, if their content is rewritten they are actively taught how to write. They know "oh, I contributed!" and feel happy about that, but they understand that they need to improve their writing.
WhisperToMe (talk) 08:54, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Lessons from this case

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Arlington Catholic High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090616135733/http://cis.neasc.org/cis_directory_of_schools to http://cis.neasc.org/cis_directory_of_schools
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified