User talk:LisaParrot

Random references

Dear colleague, Thank you for your contribution, but please bee more careful:

In List of linear ordinary differential equations, the added link has nothing to do with the topic;
- Same in 1914 in Chile
In oneAPI (compute acceleration) an English construct "common ... across ..." the "common" does not mean "familiar", it more like "shared"
In Place Kléber, the added link was to a personal image collection

etc. Dimawik (talk) 22:32, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Dimawik.

I appreciate your remarks and will take them into consideration for further reference. LisaParrot (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add the reference unless you have read the text and are sure that the text supports the facts you are trying to substantiate with the reference. A new example: in Recluse Sisters, you have added a reference to a book that, while remotely connected to the subject of nuns and hospitals, does not even mention the topic of the article (check the text of the book at [1], the only place I could found the word "recluse" was about the Sisters of Charity). Such a reference made the article worse, not better (it creates an appearance of a WP:RS in a place there is still none. Adding an arbitrary link makes no sense, please stop doing that. Before continuing to add links, it might make sense for you to review your previous contributions, and delete the links unrelated to the topics of the articles. Dimawik (talk) 05:09, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]