User talk:Userrecord101

Welcome!

Hi Userrecord101, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Largoplazo (talk) 10:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gematria

Hi. I'm sorry, but I agree with Skyerise that your contribution, though well intended, is inappropriate for Gematria. Rather than neutral content limited to supplying information, it consists of an extended expression of marvel as written from somone's (presumably yours) point of view, rather than being a neutrally worded encyclopedic treatment. An encyclopedia doesn't say subjective things like One might wonder why anyone in the 21st century would use a tool originally designed for deciphering religious scriptures in the ancient world to analyze modern subjects. It also doesn't speak of "we" (or "you", and I'm noticing "you" elsewhere in the article so I'm about to fix that). It explains everything in the third person.

See if you can condense what you've written into purely factual information without commentary about the information, and find sources to cite in support of it! Let me know if you have questions. Largoplazo (talk) 10:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Gematria, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 11:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you misinterpreted the term "reliable source." Could you specify which part of the content I provided needs a reliable source to demonstrate your understanding of "reliable source" and "citing sources"? Userrecord101 (talk) 03:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The text you've repeatedly added cites zero sources, let alone reliable ones. There's no question of interpretation here. Skyerise already supplied the two links relevant to understanding what's required. Largoplazo (talk) 12:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of the text that I added needs sources? Please enlighten me; I'm ready to have a good laugh. The entire page of Gematria is filled with fragmented and incohesive information. Anyone new to Gematria will gain very little from reading it, perhaps only the first paragraph. The worst part is that most of the information is copy and paste from another encyclopedia site.

I think you guys are too obsess with the term "If reliable sources cannot be found , should be removed from the article". That obssession destroy the entire article.

Btw, The text I added should be fall under "original research" category. :) Userrecord101 (talk) 16:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you often found scoffing and derision to be an effective strategy in achieving a goal or engaging others in a discussion of your concerns? Largoplazo (talk) 16:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All material added by anyone requires sourcing. Minimally, one citation to a reliable source per paragraph. No exceptions. Also, original research is not permitted. Skyerise (talk) 21:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Partial block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Gematria for persisting to edit-war despite multiple experienced editors telling you that your edits are unsatisfactory. This block does not prevent you from editing other articles.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Zero^talk 08:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]