From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|
Hello, A Frantic Turtle. |
Hello, A Frantic Turtle. |
||
|
I hope this comment finds you well. I am writing to address the retraction of my recent edit to the article about the ending of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. |
I hope this comment finds you well. I am writing to address the retraction of my recent edit to the article about the ending of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. |
||
|
I fully understand that the absence of references violates Wikipedia’s verifiability policies, and I apologize for including the content without the appropriate links. My intention was strictly analytical, aiming to record the real polarization that occurred in the fandom and among specialized critics regarding the final arc, something I consider a relevant historical fact for the completeness of the article. |
I fully understand that the absence of references violates Wikipedia’s verifiability policies, and I apologize for including the content without the appropriate links. My intention was strictly analytical, aiming to record the real polarization that occurred in the fandom and among specialized critics regarding the final arc, something I consider a relevant historical fact for the completeness of the article. |
||
Revision as of 14:32, 11 February 2026
Hello, A Frantic Turtle.
I hope this comment finds you well hehe. I am writing to address the retraction of my recent edit to the article about the ending of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.
I fully understand that the absence of references violates Wikipedia’s verifiability policies, and I apologize for including the content without the appropriate links. My intention was strictly analytical, aiming to record the real polarization that occurred in the fandom and among specialized critics regarding the final arc, something I consider a relevant historical fact for the completeness of the article.
Although the information is widely discussed in animation analysis communities, I admit that I had difficulty finding articles on major portals that meet the ‘reliable sources’ criteria required here.
I would like to kindly ask for your guidance: how could I format these observations so that they are acceptable for the project? Is there any type of source (even a niche one, like animation review sites) that you would recommend to validate these points, or would it be better for me to propose the text first on the article’s discussion page for community evaluation?
Thank you for your patience and work in maintaining the encyclopedia.
Sincerely, Tolabim 2025. Tolabim 2025 (talk) 12:07, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
- It sounds very much to me like what you’re wanting to put in is your own original research on the matter. We don’t allow that. If it’s truly based on information that is “widely discussed in animation analysis communities” then what you’re wanting to add sounds like a synthesis. We don’t allow that either.
- What we do allow is the summing up of reliable sources and even quoting from them. Reliable sources, however, don’t include forums, chat groups, social media, wikis or the like. If a subject is important enough to be discussed by Wikipedia, then it is important enough to have been published by experts in a non-forum environment, like a static website or a newspaper.
- If it’s not been published in one of those places, then, fascinating as the subject may be, we cannot report on it. Sorry. • a frantic turtle 🐢 12:41, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
