Jdawgrealty

Jdawgrealty, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Jdawgrealty! 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 experienced editors like Missvain (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Jdawgrealty! You created a thread called Someone deleted my content. What should i do now? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Maren Hunsberger

Hello, Jdawgrealty. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Maren Hunsberger".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 09:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable and polemic sources

In general, "cult debunking" websites don't meet our reliable sourcing requirements. We need citations to books or journal articles. In particular, the article you linked doesn't list its authors. You also removed information cited to a known reliable source (The Telegraph) and replaced in with divisive material cited to essentially a self-published website. That's been reverted, but feel free to add material with better sourcing. If you think KC doesn't have Orthodox teachers, you must find an independently-published reliable source that states that. That doesn't mean you get to remove another source that claims otherwise or that claim. Even if you think it is wrong, it is supported by citation, which means at best, there is a difference of opinion about it. Skyerise (talk) 23:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

What? The telegraph article quotes themselves qualifying themselves. That's a reference? The article I added quoted actual people. At best, there are no reliable sources. Even though , mine is an actual source because of who the article quotes. If I claim I'm a magician and the telegraph quotes me, I'm a magician according to you. Jdawgrealty (talk) 22:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)