User talk:Faredoka

Welcome!

Hello, Faredoka!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Please make an effort when creating new articles: WP:NPOV, and to get a handle on understanding categories and talk page requirements - and wP:MOS in relation to language used!

Happy editing! Cheers, JarrahTree 04:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thanks for message. You are aware that things can be promotional even if there is no commercial aspect. If I say "Indonesia is the best country in the world", that's promotional.

First, If you have a conflict of interest regarding this site, you must disclose the nature of that COI. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

Much of the text is unreferenced, and the two refs that I can access are WorldCat, never acceptable (who writes the text?), and an 11-year-old review based on an interview with a site coordinator, we need independent third-party sources

The web notability guidelines have five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability. Your text tells us about what the site hosts, but there is no sourcing to independent third party coverage, so hard to show notability

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

The text is clearly promotional SuttaCentral is unique... This is an extensively proofed and corrected version... is the natural starting point in navigating around this vast mass of textual material... For those wishing to explore original Buddhist literature, the way through the complexities of the various collections has now been made infinitely easier. Apart from anything else, whether the site is good or bad isn't a criterion for notability, and it just looks spammy having these unsourced or improperly sourced claims

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Although the lengthy WorldCat quote is attributed, I think it's at least arguable that the copied text is being used inappropriately, but I'll let that go

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: It's also worth noting that the version that was just deleted in 2024 is an exact copy of the January 2016 version that was deleted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuttaCentral (minus the tags, infobox, and a single sentence at the end of the 2016 version). - Aoidh (talk) 15:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aoidh, thanks for that, the 2015 version isn't much different either. Faredoka, how do you explain that your text so closely resembles that of blocked user Terabar? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Thanks for pointing these points! Very helpful. About the resemblance, I was just restoring the old version (from the archive url). Btw, you can also do a Wikipedia search for "SuttaCentral" to see how it is used as many references here. Again, my intention was not to promote the site at all. Cheers. Faredoka (talk) 12:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Amoralisme

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Amoralisme requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought it was idWiki :(((( My bad. Faredoka (talk) 09:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong wiki :D My intention was to #REDIRECT the page "Amoralisme" to "Nihilisme moral" in idWiki, not enWiki. Faredoka (talk) 09:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theravada New Year

Hi. I just saw that you moved the article Songkran to Theravada New Year a few weeks ago. I see two issues with this:

Firstly, you boldly performed the move without discussion, but if you look at the article talk page, you'll see that it's been quite contentious (though one of the bickering parties has since been blocked as a sockpuppet, so things have hopefully quieted down). While I also think the article needed to be renamed, it would have been preferable to discuss the move beforehand, though it's done and doesn't seem to have generated opposition, so there's no much point arguing over that now.

However, and this is the second point, I don't think it's accurate. Looking briefly at Google results, all descriptions of Theravada New Year that I find say it's a lunar (technically lunisolar) observation taking place on the first full moon in April. The Songkran-related observances, on the other hand, are based on the sun's transit into Aries, and occur on a fixed solar date (around 14 April).

I suggest the page move be reverted and a discussion started to find a better title, or to merge with South and Southeast Asian solar New Year. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]