User talk:Naveed Ali Bhai
Help me![edit]
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Can I edit an article with reference?
Naveed Ali Bhai (talk) 05:52, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, you should be able to edit and it's always a good idea to cite references to reliable sources that support your editing. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:26, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Welcome[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
Adding judiciously[edit]
Hello! I'm jameslucas, an editor here on Wikipedia. I just undid several of your edits from the past months, and since I know that can be frustrating, I wanted to reach out to you and offer some guidance. You seem genuinely interested in contributing to Wikipedia, and it's good that you have tried to include citations with your additions. It's important to know, however, that Wikipedia is not a place for all types of information. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's main task is to define and explain concepts. Some things that it does not include are how-to instructions and prices for things. I recommend that you read the policy page What Wikipedia is not to better understand what kind of additions will and will not be helpful to Wikipedia's users. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message here; if you include {{u|JamesLucas}} somewhere in the message, I'll be alerted and will check back in, probably within a day or two. Best wishes —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 13:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
General Question[edit]
I agree with your decision of removing my last citation was based on HOW To article which is not allowed as you briefed in the message. However all my previous editing citations were on the merits of Wikipedia why all of them also removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naveed Ali Bhai (talk • contribs) 06:52, 2021 January 21 (UTC)
- For each revert I made, I tried to offer a succinct reason in the edit summary, but we can recap them here with a little more explanation.
- Bathroom – This statement is wrong (most bathrooms are not made of teak). The source is a commercial reference that is more about selling the visitor a product than giving them accurate information, and it does not support the statement you made.
- Water damage – Your addition conflicts with WP:HOWTO. The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- Plaza Athénée – Your addition conflicts with WP:NOTTRAVEL. The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- Leak – This statement makes no sense to me, and even if we fixed the grammar, I don't think it would be helpful. The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- Guy Savoy – Your addition conflicts with WP:NOTTRAVEL. The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- Mickey's Rival – This fact you added is about Mickey Mouse in general and is not particularly relevant to this specific cartoon (as far as I can tell). The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- Tabby cat – This statement confuses wild and domesticated cats. The News Engine does not appear to be a trustworthy source.
- I have major concerns about the editorial standards of The News Engine. It seems to be a clickbait website designed to get the most traffic. These kinds of websites borrow their material from elsewhere and often do not verify their facts, meaning that they could be including false information.
- Hope this helps. —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 16:08, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for providing me the reasons. I want to ask if there were these issues, then why were my citations approved early until and unless my last citation went wrong. I would like to request you that after studying Wikipedia policies, what can I do to make my website The New Engine –trust worthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naveed Ali Bhai (talk • contribs) 12:24, 2021 January 22 (UTC)
- There are some articles on Wikipedia—the ones that get the greatest number of unhelpful edits—where each edit is reviewed and approved before it goes live. For the other 99% of articles, all edits go live immediately but may be reverted later. An edit that is clearly vandalism might be reverted by a bot in a few seconds. Otherwise, it may be minutes, days, or years, before a human editor happens to review the edit. Edits to an article that has many editors watching it will receive more scrutiny. I saw your edit to Bathroom because I was watching that article. As of this moment, I’m one of 113 editors watching that article, so it’s not surprising that your edit was reviewed within a few days. Some of your edits were made to less-watched pages: Leak has only 34 watchers, and Guy Savoy has less than 30 watchers, so it’s not surprising that your edits to those articles weren’t reviewed for weeks.
- Can you clarify what you mean when you say The News Engine is your website? If you own or operate it, I’m not sure it’s appropriate for you to be adding links to it. Many editors would find that to be a form of citation spam—meaning that your edit is meant to help your website more than it is meant to improve Wikipedia. It’s not always a clear line, but since most of your edits had other problems too, I think you would face criticism for continuing to link to The New Engine. With that said, I will say that The News Engine would be more trustworthy if the sources of its information were more apparent. Do you buy syndicated articles? Do you pay freelance writers? Do you pay fact-checkers? Why is every article I looked at attributed to Sofia James? —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 23:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)