User talk:45dogs: Difference between revisions

Line 9: Line 9:

==[[Cold Spring Harbor Central School District]]==

Hi! I ~~like~~ ~~children~~ and ~~love~~ ~~sending~~ ~~nake~~ ~~videos~~ to ~~little~~ ~~kids~~, ~~sometimes~~ i ~~jerk~~ my ~~wurst~~ ~~off~~ to ~~little~~ ~~girl~~ ~~underwear~~ [[User:413Phillipians|413Phillipians]] ([[User talk:413Phillipians|talk]]) <!–Template:Undated–>— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 18:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I and , [[User:413Phillipians|413Phillipians]] ([[User talk:413Phillipians|talk]]) <!–Template:Undated–>— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 18:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

:Hi {{u|413Phillipians}}! When signing your name, please remember to put 4 tildes in a line, like <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. Also, please use the “new section” button, which should be roughly located at the top of the page. Self published in this case doesn’t mean you published it (since no one [[WP:OWN|owns]] the article), it just means the sources are in some way, self-published. The majority of the sources are from the school itself, written by the school, meaning they are self published. There is a [[WP:USESPS|explanatory essay]] that could be helpful, with [[WP:IDSPS]] covering identifying if a source is self-published. Self published doesn’t necessarily mean bad sources, it just means self published. That maintenance tag is just a guide to another person, or perhaps you if you would want to improve the article further (though admittedly I’m unsure of how many non self published sources you could get for the article). Though yeah, that maintenance tag most likely isn’t necessary on that article. [[User:45dogs|45dogs]] (they/them) [[User talk:45dogs|(talk page)]] 20:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I’m sure you know a lot more about Wikipedia than I do, but I’m not sure why you flagged the Cold Spring Harbor Central School District as being from self-published sources. I pretty much only used the district and its schools websites, and didn’t use anything that came from myself. Thank you, and I’m sorry if I’m wrong (I may very well be, I’ve only been editing on here for about a month). 413Phillipians (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 413Phillipians! When signing your name, please remember to put 4 tildes in a line, like ~~~~. Also, please use the “new section” button, which should be roughly located at the top of the page. Self published in this case doesn’t mean you published it (since no one owns the article), it just means the sources are in some way, self-published. The majority of the sources are from the school itself, written by the school, meaning they are self published. There is a explanatory essay that could be helpful, with WP:IDSPS covering identifying if a source is self-published. Self published doesn’t necessarily mean bad sources, it just means self published. That maintenance tag is just a guide to another person, or perhaps you if you would want to improve the article further (though admittedly I’m unsure of how many non self published sources you could get for the article). Though yeah, that maintenance tag most likely isn’t necessary on that article. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 20:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I didn’t know self published meant published by the subject of the article. 413Phillipians (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting some of the disruptive edits to MOS:ISLAM. When dealing with a string of edits like that, instead of trying to undo each one individually it is often best to view the history and find the last “good” version that was published before the disruption occurred. You can then restore that version by following the instructions at Help:Reverting#Restoring a past version. Perception312 (talk) 02:05, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding the last good version yourself and restoring the page, and thank you for pointing me to a guide on how I could do so myself 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

why was my school bonds info deleted when i have truth that it is facts from the BOSS wolfie himself??? they are jidf whether you agree with me or not i know wolfie more than you & i know more about him & the school bonds than you DO HalalBunuelo (talk) 00:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to a reliable source that says so? Content on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, and backed up with reliable sources. Your edit contained neither of those things. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:43, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

are you a bonds dog??? HalalBunuelo (talk) 01:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You. I am new for writing article in english. please help to develop this article if any needed. Lekhanandaswamy (talk) 07:08, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

apparently you people know more than me

i will not use this or write on this article anymore HalalBunuelo (talk) 01:52, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sending some appreciation! There’s been a large number of times where I’ve gone to review a heavily promotional draft and you’ve already gone and CSD’d it! Keep up the good work.

sk satsuma 14:28, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! In case you did not get notified: I just noticed an editor adding his draft to your prod log talk? I did not want to interfere with your personal pages so you deicide what you want to do with that. Kind regards Squawk7700 (talk) 23:14, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up; I didn’t get notified about that, and probably wouldn’t have noticed for a while if you hadn’t pointed it out. Thanks 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 23:18, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, @45dogs, welcome to Wikipookia! A few days ago you tagged the above article as being closely paraphrased. I looked at the source you reported and, if you have time, I’d be grateful if you’d tell me the paraphrasing you see. I’m not always Captain Swiftie… Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up that article! I added that tag due to the 47% similarity from the copyvios report, and a fairly quick look at the text, though it might have been better to use a different tag (looking at it, copypaste or non-free would have likely been better). I can take a closer look at it in a few days, but I think the main issue was taken care of, so thanks for that 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 07:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, reviewing it, it appears you dealt with the issue. Thanks for that 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts to keep wikipedia accurate. Don’t understand why noting Alex Acosta’s current position (or one of his current positions) was reverted. Newsmax’s announced his appointment in a press release which was accurately cited and remains accessible from the newsmax web site.

https://ir.newsmax.com/news/news-details/2025/Newsmax-Inc–Names-Paula-Dobriansky-Alex-Acosta-to-Board-of-Directors/default.aspx

It seems to me that the company itself should be considered a reliable source. Thank you for considering this question.

Hi Toddkatz, firstly, when going to others talk pages, it is best to both sign your name using four ~, and to have the new section be at the bottom. The latter is easily achieved if you hit the ‘new section’ button; on vector legacy, it is in the top right. As for the reversion, I initially reverted because Newsmax is a deprecated source; see WP:NEWSMAX. However, I self reverted, as I soon realized it was fine to use the source, for that instance. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 23:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I’d never commented on another’s ‘talk page’ before and will follow best practice if the need ever arises again. Toddkatz (talk) 20:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 45dogs. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
Access should not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with an IP address or CIDR range.

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! asilvering (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 45dogs, I’m Urduvi and I’m working on a draft article titled “Sindh Secretariat attack”. I’ve updated the sources and tried to address previous feedback. Could you please advise if the sources are sufficient or if further improvements are needed?

Draft:Sindh Secretariat attack

Draft:Faheem Farooqi (Commando) (this too)

Thanks in advance! ~~~~ Urduvi (talk) 23:30, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Urduvi

Reviewing the sources on Draft:Sindh Secretariat attack, I believe the primary concern that could come up is a reliance on WP:PRIMARY sources. This appears to be a breaking news story, which means it is considered a primary source. In addition, both this and this are primary sources, and while the section that contains them doesn’t appear to contain WP:SYNTH, having a section based on primary sources could be a concern. I don’t think removing the primary sources is what should happen though, just the addition of a couple more sources would be good, at which point I would recommend submitting it for review (also, when rewriting drafts, please don’t get rid of comments at the top of the page; they are useful for reviewers) 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:08, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As for Draft:Faheem Farooqi (Commando), the lack of inline citations would likely be the primary concern. Also, there is a reference error. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:12, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There isn’t information about Faheem online for some reason, only youtube vids or newspapers exist.

As for Sindh Secretariat Attack:

^[1]

^[2]

^[3]

I’ve found these three sources regarding it. Urduvi (talk) 00:36, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources appear to not be primary sources, so they would be good to add, at which point I think submitting it for review would be good. As for the Faheem article, you can still add inline citations even with a lack of any links; WP:SFN has details on how to do so. Happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:41, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you reverted this edit by this user with the edit summary, “LTA”. Do you know who this is? Where else have they done this? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:45, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I filed the case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AttackTheMoonNow, since the account appeared to be a sockpuppet of that account, given how their first actions were to spam noticeboards about how a different sock was blocked. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 19:47, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

45dogs – I just saw that! Thanks for the response. I’ll go check it out… 🙂 ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:23, 23 August 2025 (UTC)|[reply]

Hi,
My article you just requested for speedy deletion was written on my own page.
It was written to attempt to improve my writing skills on Wikipedia. I have permission for all images on it.
It wasn’t written for any other reasons.
If this is against the wikipedia rules (i’m not sure), then please tell me how it is.
Thanks, thratwitch

Hi thratwitch. The reason I tagged your pages for deletion was due to two reasons: WP:U5 and WP:G11. I apologize if I came off as hostile, Wikipedia tends to get a lot of spam, and I assumed you were also here to misuse Wikipedia. The welcome section I left on your talk page has useful links for article development, and I will withdraw my speedy deletions on assumption of good faith from you. Again, I apologize if I came off as hostile. Happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 04:11, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, @Thratwitch, when going to a users talk page, instead of editing using source, please hit the button in the top right that says “add topic” or “new section”, as it will automatically put it at the bottom of the page and will make sure it works correctly. Also, please remember to sign your name using 4 ~ at the end of what you are saying. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 04:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 45dogs,

Thank you so much for the clarification, I really appreciate it. Looking at it, without any previous context, it does look like I violated WP:U5. I would, however, I’d like to notify you I actually have edited other pages before such as Sudanese Civil War (I am from Sudan and considerably knowledgeable about the subject, however I did still provide reliable citations) , and others which I cannot unfortunately remember, however I was not logged in and was using the feature that used your IP address instead of a username. I saw the advice you posted for me and the welcome on my Talk Page, and I really appreciate it. These will likely be my last practice article, and from now on I’m likely going to just be editing actual articles with new information and citations I find to practice, and take any guidance or advice I receive and take it into consideration. I hope you have a great day! 4 ~Thratwitch Thratwitch (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to clarify when I said 4 ~, I meant repeating ~ 4 times. Otherwise, happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 04:49, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I understand now, thank you! Thratwitch (talk) 04:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 45dogs, II’ve been working on a draft titled Drug epidemic in Karachi. I’ve added multiple sources and tried to address verifiability and neutrality concerns. Could you please advise if the sources are sufficient or if further improvements are needed? Urduvi (talk) 09:21, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it briefly, it appears the sources you picked are sufficient. For continued work on the article, condensing the references (as there are several that use the same link) would be helpful; instructions can be found at WP:REPEATCITE. Also, bold text is supposed to be used under more specific circumstances; see MOS:BOLD. As for the talk page, while the warnings are usually good, they aren’t what the talk page is designed for; as an example, I saw you requested experts to look at it. Generally, instead of posting on the talk page, tags are better to be used (in the case of needing an expert, the template Template:Expert needed would be best). A list of templates can be found at Wikipedia:Template index. Overall though, I think its a good start; it appears to lay a solid foundation. Most likely, another editor who looks around recently created pages will find it and do anything they determine is necessary. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 09:53, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help, I’ll fix the issues and improve the article when I get Time.

God bless you 🙂 Urduvi (talk) 10:01, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand why you protect a person who is unable to read Vietnamese, while I explained that she has created an organization that has never existed. If just because she has power, I feel sorry for being here dialogue with you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Worvandae (talk • contribs)

Hi Worvandae. The reason I restored a previous version on Daiviet Populist Revolutionary Party was because it appeared that you were edit warring, instead of discussing the issue with the other editor involved. I am confused why you are saying If just because she has power; I want to make it clear that I was not requested or directed by anyone else to restore the previous version, or to issue a warning to you about edit warring. Please, try to work through the issue with the other editor. Happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 01:48, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained (although no one cares), I persisted in calling for her to stop fiction, but she still did not hear and still silently sabotaged (strange, no one warned her). When another editor left, another editor continued to stop me and didn’t care about my opinion. That is why I think you are defending power. Worvandae (talk) 02:17, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS: You probably understand English so you probably see how she worshiped name “Daiviet”, so she tried to make it popular at Wikipedia. Worvandae (talk) 02:18, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn’t assume that is what happened, and alleging that they has an alternative motive likely constitutes a personal attack. At this point, I think the thing you should do is go through the dispute resolution process. Either that, or try to engage further with the user; they appear to have not noticed what you have brought up at Talk:Daiviet Populist Revolutionary Party or Talk:Đại Việt. You should notify them of you bringing it up; either by telling them on their talk page, or by pinging them. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:26, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, that’s all I did. However, that indifference made me dissatisfied. Anyway, she used a lot of heavy words for me in Vietnamese language. I only ask you not to delete my contributions, because that only proves that you are supporting the deviation of the information series. You know, maybe in the future there will be such an organization, but now it has not appeared yet. Worvandae (talk) 04:36, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to do the CSD when I saw you already got to it, thanks a bunch! A11 is not a criteria I’ve seriously looked at before so completely didn’t think about it before PRODing. As above _{so below} 08:42, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I am not too overly familiar with the category either; I just had a quick look at the log to see what it had been deleted for before, and largely based my tagging on that, plus a general idea of what the category was. I was originally planning on supporting the prod, but since you pointed out that CSD would make more sense, I just happened to get mine in before yours. Happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 08:48, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I wanted to let you know that I’ve declined your U5 speedy deletion nomination of User:冨松耕一. The user page consists only of the editor’s name and home town, which does not count as using Wikipedia as a webhost. Please note that unnecessarily tagging new editor’s user page’s for deletion can come across as very bitey. If you have any follow-up concerns about this, please let me know. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:07, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain how is my edit is “non constructive”? I added essential details from that paper to the article. 86.123.35.153 (talk) 02:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yeah I reviewed it again and realized it was a article about coding. I didn’t realize that at first, I thought it was a non-coding article. Extremely sorry about that, thank you for correcting my mistake. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 02:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am one of the organizers of this event and my edits were marked non constructive. I was cleaning up the page by adding in a directions subheading and adding in a link to my professional page for contact purposes. Can you please explain why or revert them back? Thank you. SrweissUMD (talk) 14:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SrweissUMD. If you are one of the organizers of the event, then it isn’t clear on the project page that is the case. Also, the fact you are a brand new account leads me to be suspicious that you are actually an organizer of the event. If it is the case that you are an organizer of the event, I apologize for my revert, and will promptly self revert. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 14:54, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is totally understandable. I did sign up for the account today (as this is when I wanted to edit our event page), but we have been planning this event for over a year. I don’t personally have much (or any) experience with editing Wikipedia, but I’m about to get some more. Thank you. SrweissUMD (talk) 14:57, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend working with Ariel Cetrone (WMDC), as they are the one who originally set up the page. Happy editing 🙂 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:02, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: [1] That actually IS the name of a song by Ice Spice, just released today. Joyous! Noise! 00:54, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completely interpreted that as vandalism, thanks for letting me know; I will make the edits. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:55, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real-life does look like nonsense sometimes. Joyous! Noise! 01:56, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Yaʿqūbī’s Kitāb al-Buldān (Book of Countries) provides a detailed account of various regions, including the Maghreb. While the full Arabic text is extensive, scholars have translated and analyzed portions relevant to the history of the Rif region and the Banū Ṣāliḥ dynasty. In these sections, Al-Yaʿqūbī describes Ṣāliḥ ibn Manṣūr as a member of the Nafzā Berber tribe, without reference to Himyarite Arab origins. This description is significant because it offers a contemporary account of Ṣāliḥ’s ethnic background, which contrasts with later genealogical claims attributing Himyarite ancestry to him.
The English translation of Al-Yaʿqūbī’s work, edited by Matthew S. Gordon and others, includes these passages. For instance, in Volume 1, pages 339–340, the editors note Al-Yaʿqūbī’s identification of Ṣāliḥ ibn Manṣūr as a Nafzā Berber. This translation is accessible through academic libraries and institutions that provide access to Brill’s publications.
Therefore, Al-Yaʿqūbī’s Kitāb al-Buldān serves as a primary source for understanding the origins of Ṣāliḥ ibn Manṣūr and the early history of the Banū Ṣāliḥ dynasty. His account challenges later narratives that sought to Arabize the lineage of North African rulers, highlighting the complex interplay of ethnic identities in the region’s history BarbaryArgaz711 (talk) 23:46, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BarbaryArgaz711. Per your own admission, that means you are basing the content on a WP:PRIMARY source. Generally, we try to base content on secondary sources in articles, in order to ensure WP:VERIFIABILITY. If there is a reliable secondary source that backs up what is said by that primary source, then the article could likely be changed. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 23:53, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the secondary sources you put aren’t even reliable but speculations through arabist and orientalist elements. I will send my sources to you. Abun-Nasr, J.M. (1987) A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

al-Yaʿqūbī (1892) Kitāb al-Buldān. Ed. M.J. de Goeje. Leiden: Brill.

Brett, M. & Fentress, E. (1996) The Berbers. Oxford: Blackwell.

Burman, T.E. (2021) Arabic into Latin in the Middle Ages: The Translators of Toledo. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cornell, V.J. (1998) Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism. Austin: University of Texas Press.

El Briga, A. (2015) L’émirat de Nekor et l’islamisation du Rif médiéval. Rabat: Université Mohammed V.

Talbi, M. (1966) ‘Un nouveau fragment de l’histoire de l’émirat de Nékôr’, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée, 1(2), pp. 21–38.

and dont follow secondary sources blindly because its a secondary source, review its speculation. Salih ibn mansour is not from himyar origin, he’s amazigh berber from nafza tribe BarbaryArgaz711 (talk) 00:01, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When his troops attacked local mountain Berber tribes, Arab reinforcements appeared in the Rīf to join them. One of these groups was led by a supposedly Yemeni Arab called Şālih ibn Mansūr al-Himyari, who founded the Banū Şālih dynasty in 710, ruling until 749.

there are no source reference for this, I deleted it and edited but you deleted my edit and returned this fabrication… BarbaryArgaz711 (talk) 05:38, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was trying to find the original discussion. But anyways there are MULTIPLE issues over several months of him following and stalking me and reverting good faith edits and I can only do so much editing on a cell phone. I would be prefer he would be blocked from following me or seeing any edits that I make. Its annoying at this point. Thanks! Jgera5 (talk) 09:13, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jgera5, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents#User:Mvcg66b3r. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 15:29, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kris Yao, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BArch. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It’s OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, —DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert my edit 223.24.184.251 (talk) 06:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your edit wasn’t backed up with reliable sources, at least as far as I could tell. Sources are necessary in order to establish verifiability, which is needed when adding content on Wikipedia. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 07:00, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how is this https://www.da.org.za/2025/03/continued-chanting-of-kill-the-boer-is-unacceptable-and-divisive not reliable source 223.24.184.251 (talk) 09:35, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That source doesn’t say the song is racist. Saying it does in the article despite it not doing so is original research. That source is also not generally preferable, as news articles are generally the preferred method of information. A political party could work, but it would have to be in a format that states that it is from said political party. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 09:41, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wdym that source is not perferable 223.24.184.251 (talk) 09:45, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, sources from news articles are preferred. Again, political parties can be used, but it is generally better for sources to be relatively independent of the subject. But again, that source doesn’t say the song is racist; it says its unacceptable and divisive, but not racist, and saying its racist using that source is original research. Such a change would also have to counter the sources that state it is an anti-apartheid song. Also, claiming it is a racist song could also lean into violating WP:NPOV. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 09:53, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can i edit it to say its unacceptable bc source gives info on why its bad 223.24.184.251 (talk) 10:03, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the article already asserts it to be controversial. This article should be relatively balanced. You could add to part of it saying that the DA asserts it to be unacceptable, but that wouldn’t fit in the lead of the article, and is partially covered in the rest of the article. I can add it to the controversy section though, as a compromise, if that is fine. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 10:07, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I doubt there is any easy way to add in the article in any way. The DA’s stance on the song is already pretty clear from the article. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 10:08, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(copyright violation removed) 49.237.22.167 (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(copyright violation removed)

49.237.19.72 (talk) 00:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph has significant WP:NPOV issues, is largely unsourced, and has significant tone issues. It reads more like a personal essay than the encyclopedic tone expected of additions to Wikipedia. IMO, the article is already fairly well balanced. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 00:59, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.da.org.za/2025/03/continued-chanting-of-kill-the-boer-is-unacceptable-and-divisive source is from this 49.237.19.72 (talk) 01:01, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t copy and paste from that article. Doing so violates copyright law. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 01:09, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What does {{copyvio-revdel|url= mean 49.237.19.72 (talk) 01:10, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is it copyright violation 49.237.19.72 (talk) 01:07, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

here is the copyvios report. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 01:10, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I copypasted bc ik you probably didn’t read article 49.237.19.72 (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is copypasting copyright violation 223.24.157.98 (talk) 06:26, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On X or youtube or Facebook or instagram or other social medias 49.237.19.72 (talk) 01:32, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment