User talk:Brother525

September 2009[edit]

Please stop adding unreferenced and incorrect information to the Bengeo article. You are repeatedly inserting the same information, which is a violation. If this information was to stay in the article, two things would need to happen. Firstly, you need to provide a reference for it (the Domesday Book is not acceptable, as it does not state that Bengeo was ever a village which it would need to do) and you would need to stop crediting Bengeo as currently a village, which it is not. This is not a warning, but if you continue you to insert unreferenced information which has had to removed multiple times already, you may well get an official warning. Please understand I am trying to help you here. Find a citation for Bengeo ever having officially been a village and the phrasing can be looked at. If you would like to discuss this further, please do so on the article talk page. Thank you. Sky83 (talk) 13:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Most of the message you left for me implied that your changing the article was based on original research, which is against guidelines here. The onus is on you to prove that it is in fact a village if you want this addition in the article. Until then, it can't reflect that because it is misleading. 'Suburb' is more of a colloquialism if you will, but it is certainly more accurate than village at the current time. Like I said, if you can prove that Bengeo was ever a village officially, that can go into the article, but it can't say that Bengeo is a village, as you keep adding, as this is neither true nor sourced. I have reverted your change again, please do not add back what you keep adding without a source. While I highly doubt you will find one (a reliable one) that says Bengeo is a village now, I will concede if you can prove it. By the way, this can't be a source in which someone refers to it as a village (as I am aware, as someone with local knowledge, that Bengeo is often self-designated a village in a rather bizarre attempt to make it a little more 'posh' than other areas of Hertford). You need to find a source that has some kind of legal standing etc. Best wishes. Sky83 (talk) 12:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Green-eyed monster....? Since I don't live in Hertfordshire, I would LOVE to know where that came from! Parish is fine, there are several parishes in Hertford, Bengeo is classed as one of them, so that's acceptable. Hopefully 'parish' can end this now. By the way, since I have been polite to you throughout this, I do not appreciate receiving passive-aggressive messages from you, presumably because you didn't agree with me. I am happy to talk with you about this, but please have the respect for me that I had for you. Hopefully you will take note of what the most recent editor has tried to say and this will be the end of this debate. Best wishes. Sky83 (talk) 13:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to leave it as you wish, but I want to clarify the 'warning'. It wasn't in any way a threat. You were attempting to engage in an edit war and were repeatedly adding questionable information without a source. I initially hoped you would stop doing this or at least try to find a source, but you didn't (and also didn't give an edit summary) so I left you a message in the hope that you would realise that what you were doing was wrong. Had you continued along the same path, you may well have recieved a warning, and since you are a new user who has only contributed to one article, I assumed you didn't know how everything worked around here. Hopefully you will now understand that I wasn't aggressive, and the message was certainly not uncalled for in its intent. It was, as I said, intended to prevent you from getting a warning. Also, tit for tat if you perceive you are wronged is not a good way to go. Let's just leave this here now. Sky83 (talk) 14:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]