User talk:Tesseract72

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Tesseract72! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! BMW(drive) 10:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles

Replied to your post[edit]

Hi Tesseract72, I replied to your post here. Cheers!--chaser - t 16:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Frenchs Forest[edit]

Hi. I raised a question in the help forum. As a result of the reply I received, I am contacting you in the hope that you can double-check the accuracy of a cited source. I will paste in the help forum item to explain the details.

Regards Tesseract72 (talk) 00:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

(Pasted from help forum)
cited source contradicts personal knowledge of a subject
I am wondering what is an acceptable way to edit an article to point out that
information from a quoted source seems to be wrong, but I only have my personal
recollection to back this up.
To give a specific example, the article about Frenchs Forest states (using a cited
reference) that this place underwent a transformation from farmland to residential
building starting in the 1960s. However I lived there in the 1960s and I am sure
the transformation from farmland to residential building began many years earlier
and was actually drawing to a close by the 1960s.
Maybe the cited reference was wrong. Or maybe someone has misinterpreted it. I don't
feel I can just edit the statement out based on my own recollections. But is there
a polite way of leaving the citation in, but pointing out that there is reason to
doubt its accuracy?
I have not seen examples of this dilemma in other articles I have read, so am
uncertain what is the acceptable way of editing in this situation.
Tesseract72 (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
You could add a
[dubious ] tag to that part of the article and
then explain the situation (a copy-paste of your explanation here would do). But
if I were you, I would politely request confirmation from the person who connected
that citation with that fact, J Bar (talk · contribs). However, given our
verifiability policy, (correctly) cited informaion always
tops an editor's recollection (this being the internet, and no one
knowing each other).--chaser - t 16:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from ""

I have checked the reference material and have moved the reference tag to the material that I have contributed. I have deleted the inaccurate line which was provided by another editor and wasn't actualy part of my reference material. Sorry for the late response. Cheers. J Bar (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)