User talk:Passionate historian 123

Welcome!

Hello, Passionate historian 123!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:48, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But you must provide evidence to support your edits

I reverted your edit to University of Buckingham because you did not cite any WP:reliable source for your additions. This is required in any case but when you write anything about people, policy WP:BLP makes it essential.

There is no need have a new section title for each person or even each class of person and we don't use underlining for the reason explained at the top of the article Underscore. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there!

I will fix it and can you please check it afterwards?

Best wishes,

Passionate historian 123 Passionate historian 123 (talk) 15:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that a randomly hosted PDF, that states it is a copy of Wikipedia, cannot be used as a source for Wikipedia. Wikipedia can never be used as a source for itself. The other Wiki on everipedia.org is user-generated, and so equally is not regarded as a reliable source. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:46, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, the PDF is alright. It is a direct source from the embassy. Passionate historian 123 (talk) 15:48, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The other alumni are not even cited? Where is their citation? Passionate historian 123 (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, your changes aren't really deleted, you can recover them from the article history. You could even have reverted my reversion and applied the corrections before saving. Or you can copy, paste back, change, save.

Second, yes, hands up to giving not the best reason for reverting your edit. I should have just deleted the excess mark-up, which is what provoked the knee-jerk reaction. My apologies for that.

Third, the absence of citations for anybody else is most unsatisfactory and destroys the credibility of the whole section. So if you are feeling enthusiastic, perhaps you can search for the evidence? A good start would be the articles about the people involved, to see if their alma mater is cited there.

Fourth, an autobiography page is not a WP:reliable source. For now, I have let them stand but tagged as {{better source}}: something is better than nothing given all the other dubious assertions in the section. I cut the material about which subjects they read, because the article is about the UoB: if anybody wants more on an individual then follow the link to their bio article.

BTW, you did a pretty good job on the citation syntax for a new user. Dates should be spelled out, as in 4 July 2022, don't give an archive-url= unless the article really is on archive.org (and I wouldn't bother anyway, we have an automatic process that will fill that in later). The one you really need to include is "title=". If pushed for time, the simple technique [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/justices/elron-yosef Elron, Yosef] is acceptable. The hardest part of being a Wikipedia editor is to find a reliable source, anybody can make it look pretty.

Again, welcome. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And Escape Orbit is correct: that bio at the Embassy website for M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz clearly says "Article Sources and Contributors: M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=386039612 Contributors: Bearcat, CommonsDelinker, Doremo, Katharineamy, M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz, 11 anonymous editors". What makes it even more worrying is the subject is credited as one of the authirs and sure enough, User:M.Hugo Windisch-Graetz was blocked for WP:conflict of interest editing in April 2011. Per WP:CIRCULAR, I will now remove that citation. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:04, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for this great explanation. Yes, I think the UoB page has to be freshed up a little. I did some 10 to 15 articles over the years with another account, but I lost the password... I am a former student of UoB so it definitely needs some refreshing. Passionate historian 123 (talk) 18:21, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

language=en in citations

Just fyi, you don't need to specify the language if is the same as that of the host wikipedia. It is only used if the source is a 'foreign' languages. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:47, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks for the info. Passionate historian 123 (talk) 06:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cambridge International Law Journal

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cambridge International Law Journal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Randykitty (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Cambridge International Law Journal

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

The page Cambridge International Law Journal has been deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. As the page met any of these strictly-defined criteria, it was deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been deleted are:

It seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
It appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://web.archive.org/web/20220518163819/http://cilj.co.uk/about-cilj/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. DanCherek (talk) 14:15, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]