This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Please familiarize yourself with WP:SOURCEACCESS, WP:OFFLINE, WP:RSC, WP:LR etc. before tagging a reliably sourced sentence with a citation needed tag. Verifiability does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published online. Reliable sources should not be rejected just because they are difficult or costly to access for you. Quoting WP:OFFLINE, even though Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, there is no distinction between using online versus offline sources. An accurate citation from a Routledge book (not exactly an obscure publisher) which includes the specific page for the citation, is not so difficult to verify and is a perfectly valid source per WP:V. --Cavarrone18:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
WP:PEA says: Words such as these are often used without attribution to promote the subject of an article, while neither imparting nor plainly summarizing verifiable information. They are known as "peacock terms" by Wikipedia contributors. Instead of making unprovable proclamations about a subject's importance, use facts and attribution to demonstrate that importance. Also see the example below, between an unsourced sentence (comparable to say: "Mina is an Italian singer and the greatest white voice of the world" {{citation needed}}) and "Time magazine called Dylan "master poet, caustic social critic and intrepid, guiding spirit of the counterculture generation" + ref, which is an overlapping situation in regards to Mina-Armstrong. The reference to WP:PRIMARY is even more gratious and inaccurate, you will never find in WP a policy/guideline which suggests using a primary source instead of a secondary one. The lead of WP:PRIMARY says: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources". Side note, your skepticism is just an example of Wikipedia:Systemic bias if not a borderline racial bias: would Armstrong (who for the record once participated to the major Italian music competition, the Sanremo Music Festival) said what he said not about the arguably most important Italian singer but about an obscure or even unencyclopedic American singer, you certainly would not disrupt the page and tagbombing the citation... instead, you should investigate to know what Liza Minnelli and Frank Sinatra publicly said of Mina, you would be surprised, but this is another story. Cavarrone10:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Instead of writing paragraphs of text on why not to do it, would it perhaps be easier for you to provide the quote with a place and time attributed? Jaan Pärn (talk) 08:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Maybe instead of edit warring and adding nonsense tags (citation needed tags after THREE RELIABLE SECONDARY SOURCES their reliability you are not even questioning) you should start following Wikipedia rules. You first removed a source saying it was not reliable, then I provided a Routledge publication. You tagged and removed the sentence because you don't understand WP:OFFLINE and then I explained you what WP:V means and also as a courtesy provided two additional "online" secondary reliable sources. Then you removed them with nonsensical references to WP:PEA and WP:PRIMARY, and again I explained you why you were wrong. Then you are tagbombing again with POINTy requests, now I'm done. Drop the stick or next step is WP:AN. Wikipedia:AGF is not a suicide pact. Cavarrone14:39, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear Amherst99, I am Estonian and have attended several Song Festivals so there is not much I can learn from the link. Yes it is a word in Estonian that was used to distinguish the Song Festival from other song festivals during the Soviet era, especially the School Youth Song Festival, but its use is officially discouraged by the Estonian Song and Dance Celebration Foundation, the organiser of the event. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Jaan. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Jaan, hope you had a pleasant New Year celebration.
I've added some sources in the bibliography section of the Paul Maitla article, two by Laar, but I don't have them on hand. if you have access to these sources would you be able to add a handful of inline cites into the article? Thanks! --Nug (talk) 08:42, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Happy New Year! I will try to cite appropriate sources. The problem is my university library is closed for reconstruction with very limited access but there should be plenty of material online in Estonian. Cheers, Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Greetings. I don't know the protocol on this, but I wonder if you'd be willing to contribute an edit to Aleksei Aleksandrovich Grechkin section on WWII to cover his leadership in the Tartu Offensive. I added a wikilink to the Grechkin article from the Tartu Offensive article. I don't have access to the Toomas Hiio (2006) "Combat in Estonia in 1944" reference, so I thought maybe you could add to source list of the Grechkin article from that Hiio text. Thanks for your time. Trilotat (talk) 21:04, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately my university library is closed for reconstruction. The most reliable way I can get the book and cite it will be traveling to another town within the coming months. Best regards, --Jaan Pärn (talk) 11:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Look of Love.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thanks for uploading File:Altro Mina 1972.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Your recent editing history at Mina (Italian singer) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. It is evident that this nonfree file is not used for the purpose stated in its use rationale. It therefore has no valid use rationale and is subject to summary removal under WP:NFCCE. You badly need to review the nonfree use policy, and in particular its provisions regarding the burden of proof in retaining a disputed file and the principle of minimum use. Note also that removal of clear NFCC violations is exempt from 3RR limits. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Tvjoliepoupee.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thanks for uploading File:Sylvienashville.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, Jaan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
