Joshsintrests
Welcome!
editHi Joshsintrests! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! —Alalch E. 20:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Your new article has been blanked and redirected
edit
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you created or have recently made significant changes to, Geoffrey Burel, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for pages, so it has been blanked and redirected to Battle of Civetot. Three typical reasons for this are that: (1) the article's subject appears to fail our notability guidelines; (2) the article is unsourced; or (3) the sources used in the article are unreliable. The page's history is preserved and it is possible to restore the article: If you believe that this page should remain included on Wikipedia or that this action was taken in error, then you may revert the edit that blanked and redirected the page.
Wikipedia:Your first article has more information about creating articles, and you may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. —Alalch E. 20:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- There's no evidence of the subject's notability under WP:GNG or WP:BIO, he is known for participation in a single battle, and is covered in more detail in the article about that battle, and there is no serious prospect of expansion. People interested in this Geoffrey Burel will be able to read about him in the battle article. Sincerely —Alalch E. 20:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
March 2024
edit Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Talk:Donald Trump photo op at St. John's Church are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- That’s not what I’m referring to
- if the protests were in fact not peaceful, then saying they are is a violation of Wikipedia policy on facts. Joshsintrests (talk) 13:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- That isn't how you phrased your question on the talk page. In any case, the first three sources report that the protestors were peaceful. They are all reliable sources. We report was reliable sources state. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I won’t deny that the reports say they are peaceful and are generally reliable
- and apologies about my phrasing, could have been better
- still, according to your very own source, they had set fires to/near the parish house
- this is in direct opposition with the previous sources
- I guess my real question is, how could we have sources that we cite with them contradicting on a key aspect of the event? Joshsintrests (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- That isn't how you phrased your question on the talk page. In any case, the first three sources report that the protestors were peaceful. They are all reliable sources. We report was reliable sources state. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any claim in any of the first three sources about protestors setting fire to anything. (AP Deadline Washington Post) Based on this edit I should remind you that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. We don't interpret sources, we just report what they explicitly say. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- No, I’m referring to source 4 and 5
- look at my last question in the last post. Joshsintrests (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any claim in any of the first three sources about protestors setting fire to anything. (AP Deadline Washington Post) Based on this edit I should remind you that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. We don't interpret sources, we just report what they explicitly say. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Even sources 4 and 5 call the protestors "peaceful" so that is what the article reflects. You are trying to reinterpret sources which is WP:OR. The first five sources all call the protestors peaceful. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I’m just reading what the article says point blank. Joshsintrests (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Even sources 4 and 5 call the protestors "peaceful" so that is what the article reflects. You are trying to reinterpret sources which is WP:OR. The first five sources all call the protestors peaceful. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Remsense. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks from Third Crusade. Redlinks are useful and can often be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.
In addition, clicking on the "What links here" link (in the tools listed at the left in desktop view) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Please only remove a redlink if you are pretty sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely ever to be created. Thanks! Remsense诉 15:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, my apologies! Joshsintrests (talk) 15:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)