User talk:Gangeticus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
[edit] Verifiability
Hi, and thanks for contributing. I realize that you are a new user here and are perhaps unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies, but please stop adding unverified rumors to articles. Relevant policy articles include Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No Original Research. Please respond in my Talk page if you have any questions.Borisblue (talk) 05:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Common knowledge? You admit yourself that you can't verify your information and that the things you are posting are just 'rumors'. Please read Wikipedia policy page here: The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source. Unless you have a reliable published source to back up your claims (ie, not a random blog or messageboard post), please don't reinsert that information. Borisblue (talk) 14:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
It appears that you have been copy and pasting identical blocks of text to a number of articles related to universities in Malaysia. This is inappropriate, in that there should not be so much redundant content spread over multiple articles. The content you added is not specifically related to the universities. That sort of information, if appropriately sourced, belongs in an article like Education in Malaysia, not copy and pasted in every university in Malaysia article. On top of that, I saw one edit of yours that claims a university was a breading ground for terrorists, yet there was no accompanying citation. Adding such accusatory and controversial content without a source is clearly inappropriate. Remember that wikipedia operates on verifiability, and all content needs to be attributed to reliable sources so that readers can verify any and all information. Hope this helps. If you have any questions about how wikipedia works, or anything else, feel free to contact me. (also, remember to always assume good faith in other editors. It is never appropriate to attack another user or treat someone with incivility.)-Andrew c [talk] 16:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Civility
Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors and to assume good faith on the part of other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your contributions. However, inserting libelous rumor into articles could be considered vandalism, which is subject to reporting. Please be cautious, or even better, use the talk pages to discuss any change of such nature. Bearian (talk) 21:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Wow! Calling all cars! Calling all cars! .... OK, OK! I see the admin has friends and he'll definitely use it! As I had mentioned to Andrew c up there, all comments are noted, and I will change and add citations and references accordingly. Gangeticus (talk) 21:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm. It's not a matter of admins having friends. It's a matter of following the appropriate guidelines. :) Theoretically, admins are supposed to be knowledgeable about such things. If no one has given you a link to our guideline on verifiable sources, here it is. Hope that helps. Constructive edits are always appreciated. If you have any questions, please let me know. , Dlohcierekim 02:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] January collaboration
Hi there, please vote for the article we gonna collaborate on for January. The voting process will be closed on 31 Dec. And can you add your name to the list of project members so its easier to locate all participants. Thanks! White2020 13:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
