User talk:CheriLay

Welcome![edit]

Hello, CheriLay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Vegan organic gardening into Permaculture. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:19, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Turkish cuisine[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Turkish cuisine, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:44, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Taurine, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. This source is 22 years out of date; more recent reviews exist. Although from a respected hospital, this source is spam, written by a dietitian, and is not a WP:MEDRS review. This is not a useful source, as it presents several sources together, with no specificity for the statement in the article. It is not a WP:MEDRS review. Zefr (talk) 16:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your explanations, I was about to write to you to ask about it!

I will read the guideline, but later, it will require quite some time)

But I still don't understand, why we can't use 22-year-old source if it's a well-established information which hasn't been refuted since then?

As for the Science Direct page, is it a bad source only because it has several articles on one page combined together on Taurin? Or is it bad in and off itself?

I've read a lot of Wikipedia guidelines, and as I understood, the more sources there are for each statement, the better. Of course these should be not garbage sources, but is this statement overall correct? CheriLay (talk) 17:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 2024 Drugs.com monograph is a thorough discussion that would displace a 22 year old report. ScienceDirect tends to be a compiler site, and commonly produces a listing based on search terms. It typically retrieves sources from low-quality publications, and does not produce MEDRS-quality reviews, which generally are absent from the medical literature on taurine. Also, browse the talk page, as there has been extensive discussion over the last year or so. Zefr (talk) 18:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for guidance CheriLay (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]