User talk:GoutComplex: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:05, 14 September 2023

Welcome!

Hello, GoutComplex, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 19:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Thank you. GoutComplex (talk) 20:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

Hi GoutComplex. I'm sorry to remove what you added to Charon, but the unsourced "cloud" idea is a personal interpretation, and seems unsupported by primary sources, scholarly sources or more general mythographic scholarship. The author published the work 100 years ago. She seems to have had no academic connections, reviews or history with reputable publishing houses, and should not be cited as a reliable source. Please take a look at Wkipedia's recommendations vis-a-vis reliable sources and verifiability (links are above). Haploidavey (talk) 15:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Church of the East

added links pointing to Brill and Doubleday

Emperor Taizong of Tang

added a link pointing to Doubleday

Samurai

added a link pointing to European

Three Pure Ones

added a link pointing to Doubleday

Xian (Taoism)

added a link pointing to Doubleday

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samurai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dogon people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Footscray.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bereshit mysticism (March 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bereshit mysticism and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 11:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GoutComplex! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 11:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Ööitketaja has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Ööitketaja. Thanks! InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 10:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

I like your contributions to articles on Confucianism Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 02:07, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Genghis Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doubleday.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

多謝

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Thanks for all the work you're doing to improve Daoism and Buddhism articles! Keahapana (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Xian (Taoism), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DK.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Celts, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Don't just add stuff like you did to Celts. That idea is pretty much fringe nonsense, so it should not go into a WP article. Trigaranus (talk) 07:19, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Trigaranus. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Taoism, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. This is meant to cover the majority of your recent edits. Contributions are welcome *as long as they are backed up by reliable sources*. If you simply choose not to slow down and take the time to learn about WP:RS, you are looking at an edit block not far down the line. Trigaranus (talk) 17:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources again

Please be careful when adding references. I had to revert your edit here because you did not faithfully represent your (already quite contentious) source. Moreover, you added a children's book by Russell Freedman while attempting to cite details about Confucius' life. I would be surprised if you actually read this book before you added it, so I'd ask you to please make sure you're familiar with a source before adding it, and also to make sure that it's reliable. Retinalsummer (talk) 14:45, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had to revert another of your edits (this time on the page for Taoism) because, not only did the passage you add not make sense in English, you cited it with a photobook published by Lonely Planet. This is not an example of a reliable source. Moreover, the text you added was about Daoist and Buddhist philosophy, so you need to cite a text that is about that, not one about Buddhist stupa in Asia. Please be more careful when finding sources to cite. Retinalsummer (talk) 23:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Secrets of the Universe in 100 Symbols is a book by an astrologer, not an expert on Chinese mythology, so it is not a good source for Fuxi. The Heart of the Dragon is a book published alongside a TV programme, and is not going to be high enough quality. Moreover, it's not about Chinese philosophy and/or religion, so is not a good source for Hun and po. I suggest you slow down and concentrate on making high quality edits that won't get reverted rather than adding multiple references per day. Retinalsummer (talk) 14:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 8

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Tian

added a link pointing to Brill

Xian (Taoism)

added a link pointing to Brill

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Essential facts"

This book seems to be non-WP-RS; please use better sources. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ööitketaja (June 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ca was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This topic seems notable. But any paragraphs does not have sources

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ööitketaja and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information on reliable sources

You have been asked to be careful about using reliable sources multiple times to the point that I don't think you fully understand what a reliable source is. You can learn about reliable sources on wikipedia by reading these guidelines: WP:RS. Can you please confirm that you have read and understood these guidelines? Retinalsummer (talk) 13:43, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Bereshit mysticism

Hello, GoutComplex. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bereshit mysticism, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable, low quality sources

I'll be rather blunt, if you want to contribute to articles which fall under WikiProject Ancient Near East you need much better sources that what you are currently trying to add. John Holdren and Patricia O'Connell Pearson are not experts, their book has little to do with Assyriology and adding weird poetic misinterpretations of data ("immortality" is not exactly a concept of much consequence in Mesopotamian religion, this is not Taoism, and in particular the moon has nothing to do with it) is at best disruptive. Familiarize yourself with WP:RS as well as with solid Assyriological research, thanks. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 06:24, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality sources and text

Hello, Gout Complex. I've reverted your changes to Vesta (mythology). The source you cite appears to be a ~~very obscure picture book for children,~~ school encyclopedia or similar, described as "... a K12 9th Grade World History Book". It is definitely not a reliable scholarly specialist source for ancient Roman religion. The text you added was incomprehensible to me. Best wishes, Haploidavey (talk) 21:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apollo

I'm afraid that the same goes for your addition to Apollo, and the source you claim in support - the same you used at Vesta's article "...a K12 9th grade World History". I doubt if it would stand up to verification. Haploidavey (talk) 22:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mercury (mythology)

The same goes for the Mercury (mythology) article. I've removed the same inappropriate source. Haploidavey (talk) 06:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hirohito, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Doubleday.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop citing school textbooks as sources

School/children's textbooks are not written to provide a reliable base for Wikipedia articles. Please would you also not add cited source material to introductory paragraphs, especially when the main body is well-sourced. Introductions are meant to be summaries of material already sourced and verifiable in the main body of articles. Haploidavey (talk) 18:48, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. According to the library I get various things from to cite various sources, this book was also meant for use as a history book meant to summarize things quickly for librarians, similar to a general history book for the typical buying audience. So that was why I used it.

Also, I do not understand your statement about citations in introductions. GoutComplex (talk) 19:05, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 182: / Line 182: @@
 School/children's textbooks are not written to provide a reliable base for Wikipedia articles. Please would you also not add cited source material to introductory paragraphs, especially when the main body is well-sourced. Introductions are meant to be summaries of material already sourced and verifiable in the main body of articles. [[User:Haploidavey|Haploidavey]] ([[User talk:Haploidavey|talk]]) 18:48, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
+:OK. According to the library I get various things from to cite various sources, this book was also meant for use as a history book meant to summarize things quickly for librarians, similar to a general history book for the typical buying audience. So that was why I used it.
+:Also, I do not understand your statement about citations in introductions. [[User:GoutComplex|GoutComplex]] ([[User talk:GoutComplex#top|talk]]) 19:05, 14 September 2023 (UTC)