User talk:Dauzlee
Welcome, Dauzlee![edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia, Dauzlee! I'm Royal Autumn Crest, and I've been assigned as your mentor. Around 10% of new Wikipedia accounts receive a mentor randomly taken from a list of volunteers. It just means I'm here to help with anything you need! We need to have all kinds of people working together to create an online encyclopedia, so I'm glad you're here. Over time, you will figure out what you enjoy doing the most on Wikipedia.
You might have noticed that you have access to a tutorial and suggested edits. It's recommended that you take advantage of this, as it'll make learning how to edit Wikipedia easier.
If you need assistance with anything or have any questions, click on the "Get editing help" button on the bottom right corner of your screen. This will open up a module with links to help pages and a place to ask me questions. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or go here to get help from the wider community.
Again, welcome to Wikipedia!Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 03:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
K Dauzlee (talk) 04:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
CS1 error on Ilyushin Il-76[edit]
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ilyushin Il-76, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, 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 special powers 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 practice;
- 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.
TylerBurden (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- May I please also note that, according to WP:RUSUKR new users may not edit articles related to Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Replacing Kiev with Kyiv is certainly such edit. Ymblanter (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- I know, I did not change Kyiv to Kiev in article related to modern times, I only changed such article if it was historical (for example related to Kievan Rus) for consistency (people already know Kiev is Kyiv so adding "(Kyiv)" beside Kiev is sometime unnecessary) Dauzlee (talk) 01:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- The English Wikipedia consensus is that we use Kyiv after 1991. For historical articles (certainly for everything before 1917) Kiev must be used. Ymblanter (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Edit summaries like this combined with a lot of strange unexplained edits changing referenced content from "according to" to "claimed", which apparently according to this other opinionated edit summary you think is less credible, regardless of what wording the actual reference uses, seems like some rather WP:TENDENTIOUS signs for editing this topic. TylerBurden (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence that Russia actually use human wave tactics, most of them were rather squad sized assault or armored attacks, which is while attritive, doesn't fit the very definition that was clearly stated on the article itself. Wikipedia editor love to consume any media reports as if they were 100% truthful. I add "claimed" and any words that doubted the media reports especially for example if it came from Ukraine which is as propagandistic as the Russian. Some source cited doesn't have strong evidence such as photo or video of such things happen so usage of "claimed" or "allegedly" should be allowed. You see a lot of western mainstream media that Wikipedia consider "reliable" love to put sensationalist and baseless claims for example Russia ran out of missile (or anything) as early as March 2022, until it was proven false later (this report from wikipedia considered reliable Reuter from march 2022 https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-running-out-precision-munitions-ukraine-war-pentagon-official-2022-03-25/ for example). So, like a lot of Wikipedia editor used the word "claimed" or "allegedly" when citing Russian report, I used it for article when some dubious Ukrainian claims without hard evidence. Dauzlee (talk) 04:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- That is how Wikipedia works though, the content is dictated by WP:RS, not by what Wikipedia editors deem "hard evidence". Mainstream media generally considered reliable by Wikipedia can definetely be wrong, it's still far better than relying on whatever Wikipedia editors consider "hard evidence", especially when millions of people are fooled by things such as deepfakes every day. The issue is that you are twisting wording to make things seem less credible than how the references actually put it, and given that your edits always seem to be slanted against Ukraine in some way, your editing appears WP:TENDENTIOUS. TylerBurden (talk) 13:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence that Russia actually use human wave tactics, most of them were rather squad sized assault or armored attacks, which is while attritive, doesn't fit the very definition that was clearly stated on the article itself. Wikipedia editor love to consume any media reports as if they were 100% truthful. I add "claimed" and any words that doubted the media reports especially for example if it came from Ukraine which is as propagandistic as the Russian. Some source cited doesn't have strong evidence such as photo or video of such things happen so usage of "claimed" or "allegedly" should be allowed. You see a lot of western mainstream media that Wikipedia consider "reliable" love to put sensationalist and baseless claims for example Russia ran out of missile (or anything) as early as March 2022, until it was proven false later (this report from wikipedia considered reliable Reuter from march 2022 https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-running-out-precision-munitions-ukraine-war-pentagon-official-2022-03-25/ for example). So, like a lot of Wikipedia editor used the word "claimed" or "allegedly" when citing Russian report, I used it for article when some dubious Ukrainian claims without hard evidence. Dauzlee (talk) 04:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Edit summaries like this combined with a lot of strange unexplained edits changing referenced content from "according to" to "claimed", which apparently according to this other opinionated edit summary you think is less credible, regardless of what wording the actual reference uses, seems like some rather WP:TENDENTIOUS signs for editing this topic. TylerBurden (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- The English Wikipedia consensus is that we use Kyiv after 1991. For historical articles (certainly for everything before 1917) Kiev must be used. Ymblanter (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- I know, I did not change Kyiv to Kiev in article related to modern times, I only changed such article if it was historical (for example related to Kievan Rus) for consistency (people already know Kiev is Kyiv so adding "(Kyiv)" beside Kiev is sometime unnecessary) Dauzlee (talk) 01:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)