User talk:MilesMoney: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Srich32977 (talk | contribs) Okay, another discussion. |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:: To link to an outside site, [[http, etc]], but to link to a Wikipedia site, no http, just, for instance [[Talk:Steve King]] sections have a #before the subsection title. With respect to Arzel's comments, no, ThinkProgress is not a WP:RS because they are an advocacy site that PRETENDS to have news, but doesn't, and what "opinions" there are on it can be neither properly attributed, nor are they strictly opinions in the usual sense; they are like opposition candidates' sites; not that concerned with accuracy, nor evidence that they really believe the "opinions" expressed. Colbert report, again, is a comedy site; no evidence that the opinions are serious or not, that is not the reason they broadcast. The "not my job to fix" comment is a perhaps harsh way of expressing what is in fact a universal WP policy, that it is the posting editors' responsibility to back up an edit with WP:RS, not to post and expect others to find WP:RS. It is certainly appropriate to put content on the Talk page, and ask there for fellow editors to find appropriate refs, it happens all the time.--[[User:Anonymous209.6|Anonymous209.6]] ([[User talk:Anonymous209.6|talk]]) 17:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC) |
:: To link to an outside site, [[http, etc]], but to link to a Wikipedia site, no http, just, for instance [[Talk:Steve King]] sections have a #before the subsection title. With respect to Arzel's comments, no, ThinkProgress is not a WP:RS because they are an advocacy site that PRETENDS to have news, but doesn't, and what "opinions" there are on it can be neither properly attributed, nor are they strictly opinions in the usual sense; they are like opposition candidates' sites; not that concerned with accuracy, nor evidence that they really believe the "opinions" expressed. Colbert report, again, is a comedy site; no evidence that the opinions are serious or not, that is not the reason they broadcast. The "not my job to fix" comment is a perhaps harsh way of expressing what is in fact a universal WP policy, that it is the posting editors' responsibility to back up an edit with WP:RS, not to post and expect others to find WP:RS. It is certainly appropriate to put content on the Talk page, and ask there for fellow editors to find appropriate refs, it happens all the time.--[[User:Anonymous209.6|Anonymous209.6]] ([[User talk:Anonymous209.6|talk]]) 17:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
:::Seriously, this is the sort of thing that belongs on the Steve King talk page, ok? [[User:MilesMoney|MilesMoney]] ([[User talk:MilesMoney#top|talk]]) 04:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC) |
:::Seriously, this is the sort of thing that belongs on the Steve King talk page, ok? [[User:MilesMoney|MilesMoney]] ([[User talk:MilesMoney#top|talk]]) 04:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
::::I have brought this up at the ANI board [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:MilesMoney_Personal_attacks.2C_non-reliable_sources_and_general_non-constructive_editing. here]. [[User:Arzel|Arzel]] ([[User talk:Arzel|talk]]) 03:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 03:33, 27 July 2013
Welcome!
Hello, MilesMoney, 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:
- Introduction to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
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 your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! PrairieKid (talk) 22:22, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
You may want to take part in this discussion.
Here . Casprings (talk) 00:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
And here's another (totally unrelated to the DRN above): Talk:Gary North (economist). – S. Rich (talk) 04:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
King
Think Progress and the Colbert Report are not reliable sources. It is not my job to fix your POV errors. Additionally that section contains original research which is also not allowed. Arzel (talk) 04:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- Please use the Steve King talk page. I'm not sure how to link to it, but I'm sure you can find it. MilesMoney (talk) 04:50, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- To link to an outside site, http, etc, but to link to a Wikipedia site, no http, just, for instance Talk:Steve King sections have a #before the subsection title. With respect to Arzel's comments, no, ThinkProgress is not a WP:RS because they are an advocacy site that PRETENDS to have news, but doesn't, and what "opinions" there are on it can be neither properly attributed, nor are they strictly opinions in the usual sense; they are like opposition candidates' sites; not that concerned with accuracy, nor evidence that they really believe the "opinions" expressed. Colbert report, again, is a comedy site; no evidence that the opinions are serious or not, that is not the reason they broadcast. The "not my job to fix" comment is a perhaps harsh way of expressing what is in fact a universal WP policy, that it is the posting editors' responsibility to back up an edit with WP:RS, not to post and expect others to find WP:RS. It is certainly appropriate to put content on the Talk page, and ask there for fellow editors to find appropriate refs, it happens all the time.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 17:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- Seriously, this is the sort of thing that belongs on the Steve King talk page, ok? MilesMoney (talk) 04:30, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- To link to an outside site, http, etc, but to link to a Wikipedia site, no http, just, for instance Talk:Steve King sections have a #before the subsection title. With respect to Arzel's comments, no, ThinkProgress is not a WP:RS because they are an advocacy site that PRETENDS to have news, but doesn't, and what "opinions" there are on it can be neither properly attributed, nor are they strictly opinions in the usual sense; they are like opposition candidates' sites; not that concerned with accuracy, nor evidence that they really believe the "opinions" expressed. Colbert report, again, is a comedy site; no evidence that the opinions are serious or not, that is not the reason they broadcast. The "not my job to fix" comment is a perhaps harsh way of expressing what is in fact a universal WP policy, that it is the posting editors' responsibility to back up an edit with WP:RS, not to post and expect others to find WP:RS. It is certainly appropriate to put content on the Talk page, and ask there for fellow editors to find appropriate refs, it happens all the time.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 17:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- I have brought this up at the ANI board here. Arzel (talk) 03:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)