User talk:Berstabit

Berstabit, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Berstabit! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neumont University

Please use secondary sources for adding content to Wikipedia. I have removed some content you added to Neumont University, as it linked to one of the defendants in the case. And regarding a certain link that pointed to certain pictures, while I'm sure you had only the best of intentions, do not post that link again, ever. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:47, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someguy 1221 - the egregious actions of CollegeTimes in the months following the lawsuit are relevant to the story of Neumont University vs. CollegeTimes. The complaint filed by Neumont (and subsequent legal documents) characterize the issue as Cyberstalking, harassment, and onoing libel. I am glad that you see how hideous and awful the use of that article was in Mr. Nickles cyberstalking against the Unviersity, but your edits to the Neumont page are not a correct characterization of the legal issue, or Mr. Nickles' pathological and erratic behavior. How do you propose we correct the record to make the Wikipedia page reflect the facts of the matter.Berstabit (talk) 23:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Find a secondary source that discusses Mr. Nickles' behavior. That's the same way everything else is done on Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd actually prefer to keep the conversation here, if possible. Also, no no no no. We don't need your own analysis of Nickles' writing, or legal briefs filed against him in court. We need actual secondary sources - that is, sources that have been written and published by people who have literally nothing to do with Nickles or this case. No using Nickles, no using people who are suing Nickels, and no using a judge who was ruling against Nickels. An actual secondary source would be a journalist who never worked with him, publishing under a newspaper that also never worked with him, or sued him, etc. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree with Berstabit and NU DOE and User:Nemont, thank you to ElKevbo for finally deleting the Controversy section from the page, our prestigious university doesn't deserve these attacks on our reputation. President Obama and Steve Forbes have both declared Neumont is the best computer science program in the United States. We are not a sham. Lymani (talk) 07:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]