Talk:Newton Public Schools

message: John from Idegon, in just the past hour you have again deleted my posts on the talk page and also deleted an entire section of the Newton Public Schools Wikipedia page. This is the very definition of an edit war. Prior to what has claimed, the issues regarding class material and retaliation are under investigation by the federal government right now. Of course, no one else who views this page knows this because you continue to delete everything I write as soon as I write it.
The "Controversies" section has been part of this article for months, and you didn't object to it. Why do you now delete it?
You also appear to have deleted the History of the article after July, 2015. I have no doubt that it can easily be shown that there were a number of edits to the article after that time, including some which I made less than two hours ago and you deleted. This is beyond inappropriate.
As stated below, this is NOT a local issue or a bygone issue but has received publicity in both national and international news sources. The issue has been the subject of a completed state investigation and ruling, and there is an ongoing federal investigation as well. This is extremely unusual for any school district and deserves mention. It has been brought up repeatedly at School Committee meetings and several nationally-known groups have commented on the issue (one issued a "Call to Action" to its members). I am re-posting what you deleted. Please do not continue to delete my posts and edits. 
SurfRI (talk) 03:55, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: November 29 conversation starts here

message: In October, 2011, controversy occurred over a text used in high school World History classes which contained content that was allegedly anti-Israel.[7] Although administrators said they would remove the text,[8] it remained in use for at least a year afterwards. [Reference one or two sources here].
What do you think of the edit, which is the reason we're supposedly here? Do you have anything to say about it?
(SurfRI (talk) 05:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't say without the sources. I am not going to tell you again. STOP TALKING ABOUT THE EDITORS. I will not warn you again. You are new here; whether you choose to believe it or not, we are trying to help. Your entire editing history is pretty much this article. The other editors here have made hundreds of thousands edits, to tens of thousands articles. It isn't a giant leap to understand that perhaps we know more about how things get done here than you. Please, please, understand that discussion, dispassionate discussion, based solely on the sources is how change occurs here. Also, there has been no administrative action taken on this article, nor on any of the editors here. Your behavior is the only behavior here that is, as of this point, sanctionable. Wikipedia has been around almost 15 years and the modes of doing things have developed across that time. Although everyone has input on how things get done, this is not the place for it. Please cease the histrionics or find something better to do. No one is abusing either you or the process here (except you and you don't seem to know any better). I don't know about you, but if I wondered into a new place and found its normal operations to be as displeasing as you obviously do, I'd just go elsewhere. John from Idegon (talk) 06:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If the sources you are advancing are the ones from up in your wall of text above that appear below, I would oppose that. It's trivial, and the sources themselves say that. It appears to have been nothing more than a misunderstanding about an oversight, nothing more. Not worthy of inclusion in the article. John from Idegon (talk) 06:21, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

text: I'm done. There is a consensus on what the page should look like. You refuse to engage in any discussion without ascribing motives to the other editors and demanding that things be done your way. Take some time, read up on policy and procedures and come back when you are prepared to participate in a meaningful and effective manner. As I said, there is a consensus for what the controversy section should look like. Don't change it. If you want to improve the article, update the stats. They are 7 years out of date. Tata. John from Idegon (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy over class material

message: Due to the extremely disruptive editing of , this page has been rendered useless. Besides the obvious TLDR, the editor has been interspersing their comments inside other editor's comments, editing their earlier comments and in at least one instance on Dec 1, inserted a comment in the midst of another editors comment from JUNE.
I have no idea who has said what, and I am certain no one else does either. 
I am asking the following from an Admin:
#Archive the entire talk page.
#Give SurfRI a final warning for talk page disruption, and point them to appropriate guidance for proper talk page etiquette.
Most times, I edit from a tablet. I cannot load this entire page. Help, please. John from Idegon (talk) 10:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The talk page won't be archived until it's inactive, even if you disagree with how the discussion has unfolded including walls of text. That being said, if you have an editorial issue with the person in question, I suggest you file something at WP:ANI. However, it does seem  has already received a final warning from  above. Mkdwtalk 22:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Rebooting this page

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Newton Public Schools. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1739513286/School-Committee-in-60-seconds-SpEd-deficit-Newton-MCAS-results-and-budget-planning
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:44, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified