User talk:Zero Contradictions

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia, Zero Contradictions!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. We hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

While editing Wikipedia:

Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Be bold, but do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
Provide reliable sources to the content you add. If you are adding biomedical information, please follow this guideline.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.

If you have any questions, check out the Teahouse or ask me on my talk page. Please sign your messages on discussion pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, welcome! ----Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello, I'm 10mmsocket. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Channel Tunnel, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 10mmsocket (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reaching out, and sorry for the late response. I do have a source for one of the sentences that I added to the lead section, but I didn't include it because: 1. the source is cited for a completely identical sentence later in the article, 2. I didn't know to cite the same source twice at the time, and 3. since lead sections don't always include sources for their sentences. In hindsight though, I suppose every sentence of the lead section for Channel Tunnel should be cited, to maintain consistency with the other sentences.

If I'm not mistaken, WP:REPEATCITE explains how a source can be cited twice, by adding a name parameter, right? If so, then I could re-include the sentence in the lead section by specifying a name parameter, right? Zero Contradictions (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

You have an issue with User:Farcaster?

OK, but right now you don’t seem to know what you are doing, so please worry about yourself and leave others alone. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:02, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any issues with him personally. I'm glad that he's contributed to Wikipedia. I also agree with some of the opinions written on his userpage, and I have no problems with him expressing his opinions. My only contention is that Wikipedia user pages aren't supposed to be blogs, as indicated in the guidelines, WP:NOTBLOG. As I've said before, I don't see any reason why he should use his user page as a blog when he could use a more appropriate site for that purpose.

And what do you mean when you say that "[I] don't know what I'm doing"? I know that I'm still learning how to edit Wikipedia, but regardless, my reason for nominating the user page for deletion is still clearly supported by the Wikipedia guidelines and by at least two other users who have commented on this issue before. Zero Contradictions (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, your MfD nomination was wrong in so many ways, I don’t think it is worth you trying again any time soon. Get more experience editing mainspace. Participate in some WP:XfDs before making your own. SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:47, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the advice. Zero Contradictions (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 14:30, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]