Jump to content

User talk:Sxologist: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Previous editing: I sent you a welcome message in an earlier section, but you sure don't edit like a newbie.
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 72: Line 72:


Sxologist, have you edited before under another username? Many of your edits show a familiarity with Wikipedia procedures and policies, and even some arcane essays (as in [[Special:diff/946720866|this edit summary]]) that would be very unusual for an editor whose first edit was less than two weeks ago. Can you disclose your previous editing history here? Thanks, [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 02:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Sxologist, have you edited before under another username? Many of your edits show a familiarity with Wikipedia procedures and policies, and even some arcane essays (as in [[Special:diff/946720866|this edit summary]]) that would be very unusual for an editor whose first edit was less than two weeks ago. Can you disclose your previous editing history here? Thanks, [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 02:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

:I have not had a prior username. I have edited without an account on small grammatical corrections in the past which are unrelated to the topics I have focused on now. I have tried to find the specific IP which links to corrections but have been unable to do so because it was probably 2 edits in 2019. Also, I had to be corrected by Flyer in terms of correct citations, but have since stuck to providing sources to meet standards. I think the fact I am a first time editor is apparent. When you say "arcane essays" do you mean to imply that the edit summary is not up to standard? If so I apologize and will adjust edit summaries accordingly. Is there documentation you can point me to on how an edit summary should be written? Thanks, [[User:Sxologist|Sxologist]] ([[User talk:Sxologist#top|talk]]) 04:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

::I also want to add on the topic of "not editing like a newbie". I have simply taken precaution to edit in a fashion similar to others with a long history of editing so that my edits will be constructive. This includes looking at other users contributions and checking what is appropriate, and googling the wikipedia policies when required. Flyer did point me in the right direction regarding these at the start so I have tried to stick to that, perhaps giving the image I am an experienced editor. It's simply me trying to be a good editor. It is apparent that I was too aggressive in some instances, and that is duly noted. Consensus is important. Thanks --[[User:Sxologist|Sxologist]] ([[User talk:Sxologist#top|talk]]) 04:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:38, 22 March 2020

Sxologist, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi Sxologist! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


Cite page numbers

Cite page numbers when you add book sources. And, preferably, link to those page numbers. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which citation is in question? Sxologist (talk) Sxologist (talk) 02:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You should be adding citations to all of the book sources you've added. For example, where are the page numbers for this? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. I will get the page number now. It does have the entire pdf available in Google books from which I got the reference. Sxologist (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thesciencenewsonline

Are you this editor? Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. Sxologist (talk) 02:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you aren't new. I'm sure I'll figure it out eventually. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And in the meantime, do try to stick to WP:MEDRS-compliant sources for medical/biomedical material. Part of this means avoiding primary sources. WP:SCHOLARSHIP is also clear about primary sources. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 02:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have made previous edits without an account but I just wanted to ensure I edited as a user going forward. Thank you for clarification regarding sources. Sxologist (talk) 02:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I checked edits made by that profile and they are seemingly anti-gay. I do not hold such a stance. Sxologist (talk) 02:50, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Sxologist, 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! Mathglot (talk) 01:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Standard notice for all users editing in gender-related topics

Hello, Sxologist, I noticed your changes at LGBT culture, Same-sex relationship, Men who have sex with men, and other gender-related articles. This is considered a potentially controversial topic area, and engenders heightened scrutiny from the community. Please familiarize yourself with the stricter guidelines on articles in this topic area, from the standard notice written by Arbcom, and included below. Please carefully read this notice, and follow the links:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

Thanks, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 02:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous editing

Sxologist, have you edited before under another username? Many of your edits show a familiarity with Wikipedia procedures and policies, and even some arcane essays (as in this edit summary) that would be very unusual for an editor whose first edit was less than two weeks ago. Can you disclose your previous editing history here? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have not had a prior username. I have edited without an account on small grammatical corrections in the past which are unrelated to the topics I have focused on now. I have tried to find the specific IP which links to corrections but have been unable to do so because it was probably 2 edits in 2019. Also, I had to be corrected by Flyer in terms of correct citations, but have since stuck to providing sources to meet standards. I think the fact I am a first time editor is apparent. When you say "arcane essays" do you mean to imply that the edit summary is not up to standard? If so I apologize and will adjust edit summaries accordingly. Is there documentation you can point me to on how an edit summary should be written? Thanks, Sxologist (talk) 04:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also want to add on the topic of "not editing like a newbie". I have simply taken precaution to edit in a fashion similar to others with a long history of editing so that my edits will be constructive. This includes looking at other users contributions and checking what is appropriate, and googling the wikipedia policies when required. Flyer did point me in the right direction regarding these at the start so I have tried to stick to that, perhaps giving the image I am an experienced editor. It's simply me trying to be a good editor. It is apparent that I was too aggressive in some instances, and that is duly noted. Consensus is important. Thanks --Sxologist (talk) 04:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]