User talk:Azarboon

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Azarboon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page CAP theorem did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! PetraMagna (talk) 19:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't removed your additions, but using blog posts as a source on Wikipedia is usually a bad idea unless you know what you are doing. The existing blog post by Abadi could be counted as reliable since it's (1) written by a subject expert and (2) revisited later in reliable publications, but it should be removed as well since there is a published source that says the same things. PetraMagna (talk) 19:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for comment. The blog post author is a subject matter expert. Also I mentioned that he "argues" about those counter points; it's good to expand the view of readers but also indicates that the opinion is arguable. Azarboon (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to say that not any software engineer is a subject expert, but seeing that Brooker has published in peer-reviewed conferences he definitely ticks that checkbox. However, if someone challenges that source, I am pretty pessimistic about the outcome as having a publication is a very low bar. Re the "argues" wording, it usually applies to biased sources. Using it in this context is fine, but it doesn't automatically justify using an unreliable source. PetraMagna (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Azarboon! Your additions to Serverless computing have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's elegibility.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I've edited it accordingly: paraphrased and summarized it. Also, the content is free to use under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license (CC BY-SA 4.0). Azarboon (talk) 03:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yan Cui (software engineer) (May 20)[edit]

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Yan Cui (software engineer) 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 10:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Azarboon! 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! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 10:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, wikis, personal websites, and websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight. These sources may express views that are widely acknowledged as pushing a particular point-of-view, sometimes even extremist, being promotional in nature, or relying heavily on rumors and personal opinions. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Note in particular that self published books are not reliable sources. MrOllie (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MrOllie thank you for explanation. i will never cite self published books. Also, is there any black list of publishers? I think once you wrote that IGI Global should not be cited. please let me know if I can find list of such publishers so I won't cite them. Azarboon (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]