User talk:Strgzr1

Start every day right!

The Citadel

Your assertions regarding the number of non-cadet undergraduates and the on-campus residential requirement for the Corps of Cadets are uncited and contradict referenced material elsewhere. Please provide a source for your edits. Continuing to make unsupported edits constitutes vandalism. Billcasey905 (talk) 18:45, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bill, included the profile for class of 2016 and included reference.

Possible Conflict of Interest

Hello, Strgzr1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. 🎓 Corkythehornetfan 🎓 18:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Corky, read the guidelines and there is no conflict of interest (COI) here. Ensuring all information is verifiable/accurate and drawing directly from viable and reliable sources as attributed.

I would strongly recommend you not say "our..." in your summaries if you do not work for the university are or are affiliated with it in any way. That's what makes other users believe there is a COI. 🎓 Corkythehornetfan 🎓 18:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, no, that was a quote from the website--added that for clarification! Should've put it all in ""! Sorry.

Citadel references

Please use this time to resolve your battles with Bob, rather than spreading them to other pages. Also, when removing or reorganizing large swathes of content, it is highly inappropriate to mark your edit as minor. Billcasey905 (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bill--will make some more edits today and utilize references. Also, please take a moment yourself before undoing edits with referenced data.

CheersStrgzr1 (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Hello, I'm Dan Koehl. I noticed that in this edit to Military Classic of the South, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Dan Koehl (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Military Classic of the South. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dan Koehl (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Citadel edits

Note that your edits also constitute edit warring. You must reach consensus before continuing to edit back and forth. Continued edit warring is likely to result in a block, especially since you're well-aware of the need for discussion, having requested a block of the other party in the past. An RfC might help. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 02:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rob--will look into the RFC option. Further changes from me in regard to this article are just word/sentence ordering and flow at this point. Thanks again.Strgzr1 (talk)

The Citadel edit war

If you and the IP keep edit-warring, I will request a full protection on the page until you can use the talk page for discussion. Violating the 3RR could get you both blocked, as well. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 02:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't put me in the same category with this editor/Bob80. Check edit history and the facts, Corky. I've requested assistance here...Strgzr1 (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although you have been a little better to be accepting, the history shows you and Bob having quite the edit war and hardly ever agreeing on something. Full protection until consensus can be reached or a ban on the related articles are the best options. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 18:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bob80 has been in countless editing wars with too many people to list! PLEASE NOTE: It seems Bob80 may also edit under IP address: 2601:149:8100:b951:9963:681a:552a:73a3 See edits on Battle of Midway and other articles... Until consensus is reached by admin and editors, I will simply replaced relevant images and the referenced data Bob80 continually deletes. Will make no other changes.Strgzr1 (talk) 20:34, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about your edit-warring

Please see here. Thank you. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Appreciate itStrgzr1 (talk) 21:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]