User talk:173.47.248.143

Welcome!

Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

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:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 15:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Verifiability and sourcing at Masculism

Thanks for your attempts to improve the article Masculism. Unfortunately, those edits have had to be undone. Wikipedia relies strongly on the core principle of WP:Verifiability and WP:SOURCING, which in a nutshell means, we don't add our own opinions to articles (even if we are sure we are right); instead, we find a reliable source like a published book or journal article, reputable magazine or newspaper, or reliable internet resource and read what they have to say on the topic, and then we summarize the main points of such reliable resources in the article.

Conversely, as in your two edits, when an article contains content that represents the views of reliable sources, and contains footnotes so you can look up those sources yourself and verify that the Wikipedia article fairly represents the content of the sources and is not just some random editor's opinion, then you need a good reason to remove the material. At Masculism, you removed sourced material without giving a good reason for it. It's possible to remove sourced material, but you would have to show that the source given was unreliable, or that it does not represent the majority of reliable sources on a subject; but you can't remove it just because you disagree with it. Another way, is to raise a discussion on the Talk page (e.g., at Talk:Masculism) and try to persuade other editors that your point of view is correct; if you are successful in gaining consensus for your view, then you may remove (or add) the disputed material.

I hope this is clear and helpful. If not, feel free to contact me at my Talk page any time, or you can ask questions at the Tea house, or WP:Help desk. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I've undone your removal of a large amount of sourced content at Zapotec peoples dealing with women. If you feel the material on women is excessive at that article, please trim it based on the given sources, or raise a discussion on the Talk page. There seems to be a pattern here, as your edit summaries for the material you removed from Masculism (here and here) appear to be based on a perception of unfairness towards men, without being supported by sources. This also appears to be true in your removal of content from Women's wing as well. Please be aware that Wikipedia is not a soapbox for editors to promote their views on a particular topic. You are welcome to make additions or removals at articles as long as they are supported by the preponderance of reliable sources. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

---