User talk:IdioticAnarchist

Welcome![edit]

Hello, IdioticAnarchist, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page 1959 Tibetan uprising did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Introduction to referencing
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Kautilya3 (talk) 22:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed restriction[edit]

Hi IdioticAnarchist,

I have noticed that you have recently edited pages related to the Russo-Ukrainian War. Please note that, due to community consensus documented at WP:GS/RUSUKR, only extended-confirmed editors may make such edits.

When in doubt, please assume that a topic is covered by this restriction. We call this "broadly construed". If this still leaves you unsure about whether a topic is affected by the restriction, feel free to ask on my talk page.

This is not widely announced to newcomers, so I'm not blaming or condemning you for not knowing about this. I'm also not saying that your editing has been problematic in any other way. Your edit may well have been perfectly fine in all other regards, yet may have been removed for this reason.

Additionally, Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee has recognized "Eastern Europe or the Balkans" as a generally contentious topic area. Don't worry: The restriction to extended-confirmed editors is about the Russo-Ukrainian War, not the entirety of Eastern Europe and the Balkans. The box below contains standardized advice for everyone.

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

This may be confusing, so I'll attempt to summarize it:

Only extended-confirmed editors may edit pages related to the Russo-Ukrainian War. Details and exceptions can be found at WP:GS/RUSUKR.
All edits about Eastern Europe and the Balkans, by all users, need to be done with extra care.

I hope this helps. Please let me know if there are any questions.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm 25stargeneral. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Myanmar civil war (2021–present), 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. 25stargeneral (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

or just use the citation tool in the editor.

{{ + }} make templates. Your citations don't do anything because you're calling non-existent templates instead of using the <ref>{{citation|url=}}</ref> template. Yue🌙 20:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I was tired and made a mistake. Thanks for fixing it! IdioticAnarchist (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improper interpretation of sources[edit]

Please read your sources carefully before you add content to Wikipedia. I'm making this comment only because I've noticed you make the same misinterpretation twice. In this The Irrawaddy article, the author writes that Rohingya recruits were reportedly being used by the Tatmadaw in Buthidaung. The author says that ALSO, there were reports that ARSA and ARA were in Buthidaung, but he does not say that they were fighting alongside the Tatmadaw. This distinction is important, and is made by several other news articles discussing the same attacks on the town. I pointed that out the last time you added this exact information to List of ethnic armed organisations in Myanmar. Don't make connections yourself even if you think it's obvious because you're bordering on making original conclusions. Just say what the reliable sources say because the authors of those reliable sources took extra care to only report what they believe is factual. Yue🌙 22:41, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, but I do not remember using that article. I primarily used this one https://www.rfa.org/burmese/program_2/rohingya-killed-buthidaung-04152024043904.html when stating that the ARSA and ARA fought with the junta. Of course, I am not Burmese, cannot read Burmese, and cannot translate Burmese, so I have no clue whether Google translated it correctly. I'm just going with whatever Google gives me.

Aside from that, I see how my misinterpretation can be considered an original conclusion, and reading the article you linked, its quite clear that the Tatmadaw and ARSA/ARA attacks were seperate incidents. Sorry if I did make an original conclusion when linking that article (although, like I said, I do not remember linking that article in the first place, but I have memory problems so I certainly could've just forgot), I'll make sure to read articles more carefully and try not make any more OR's from now on :3 IdioticAnarchist (talk) 03:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Dendera light. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 08:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]