User talk:Seemslegitz

Welcome!

Hello, Seemslegitz, 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 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend 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! Skynxnex (talk) 16:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah- Thank you for telling me this, I actually joined Wikipedia to change the Bluey (2018 TV series) and fix many of the mistakes I noticed on the article but discovered it was a semi-protected page! So I am currently jumping about revising articles with faults.

Say you can help me with this article I'm currently revising, it would be much appreciated!! Versailles wedding hall disaster Seemslegitz (talk) 16:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Just as a general note about your changes to 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend if WP:Reliable sources consistently cover that event with the YouTuber, then it possibly be could be included if it meets due weight (which is part of our Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy).

For the Versailles wedding hall disaster article, we in general prefer non-YouTube sources. The one you added seems like it may be mostly news reports but on a random channel makes it iffy so it'd be best if you replaced it with a news report or perhaps some other source. For changing the wording of the people who died, you may want to read MOS:EUPHEMISM to understand why the earlier wording might be more in Wikipedia style. I may or may not contribute at all since I'm not an expert

For Bluey, before you're autoconfirmed, consider using WP:Edit requests on the Bluey talk page if you see a particular bad error that has an obvious fix you can cite or is otherwise clear.

I'll say that English Wikipedia can have a lot of rules and conventions; so more of your edits may be changed or reverted. Contribute in good faith, not too fast to begin, and be willing to learn from mistakes! Skynxnex (talk) 16:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see, well, that YouTuber IS small, so it's highly unlikely any news media will cover it.

As for Versailles, I included the random channel due to it showcasing the people literally falling and music in the video that is mentioned...

Bluey, I'll do the edit request.

3

Seemslegitz (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Seemslegitz!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why was this sent? I mean that politely!! -w-" Seemslegitz (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, I'm Guessitsavis. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fursona, 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. Thank you. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 23:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hewwo,Guessitsavis! This is Seemslegitz, considering ur a active member of the fandom (or halkeye over the Fursona article) you should know that the term "Original species" is self explanatory to furries. Protogens are also well known and if someone doesn't know, the term is a Google away due to its popularity. Due to both of these being basic terms, sources aren't needed. Especially for evidence that furries make their own species (I would know considering I made a not at all know species called the Deutsche Dragon and Swedish Dragon.) If the protogen is what needs sourcing, I'll leave out that part of it! <3 -Geode (He/Him/They) Seemslegitz (talk) 23:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the reader's responsibility to look up references. The editor who adds the information has the burden of providing a reliable source. ... discospinster _talk 17:03, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Fursona. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Qzd (talk) 21:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Original species" is a term that defies itself, there is no need for citing a source. -Alex (He/him/they) Seemslegitz (talk) 21:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! Please check out WP:NOR "On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists.", and "To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented." According to this policy, the claim that you are inserting into said article has no citeable and verifiable source which supports your claim, and is therefore not allowed unless you can reliably back it up.

I added this on the other Guessitsavis' talk page, but also thought to put it here so you might see it and understand, I have reverted your edit for the time being, however should you find a source online you are more than welcome to revert my edit and cite your edit. 108.49.72.125 (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you have said, this is for a 'claim', I am not making a claim, I am stating a fact that doesn't need any such sourcing due to it being self explanatory. The Wikipedia original research policy does NOT apply to this instance. -Alex (he/him/they) Seemslegitz (talk) 22:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I quote "On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists." so yes, WP:NOR very much applies in this instance. I would also like to add this isn't self-explanatory for most readers, and see WP:BURDEN, it is up to YOU as the author to cite sources, not up to the reader to Google it or make what they will. You must understand that nobody has an issue with you making this claim/fact, however, the issue is that you aren't citing a source which is essential! I know you are editing in good faith, but please don't revert edits until a consensus is reached, otherwise the excessive reverting might result in an edit war. Somebody else has undone the edit to the article, and I strongly request you not to revert it until you find a reliable source to back up your claim. 108.49.72.125 (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Bluey (2018 TV series) have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Bluey (2018 TV series) was changed by Seemslegitz (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.905697 on 2024-02-08T16:18:34+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]