User talk:B00nish w4rs

Welcome![edit]

Hello, B00nish w4rs, 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 WinZip 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 new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. —C.Fred (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your information C.Fred. Actually I just came here to protect readers of the Wikipedia from an evil scam schmeme that is used against millions of computer users worldwide and picking up pace lately. Unfortunately I had to learn that information provided by a leading IT security company isn't a "quality source" according to Wikipedias standards and therefore can't be used in an article. So the article has to remain an advertisement for a scam company. Of course under such circumstances I can't continue editing since contribution to an institution that allows the article of a scam company to sound like an advertisement but refuses to accept proven information about their scam practices isn't compatible with my ethical standards --B00nish w4rs (talk) 19:11, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be here with the intent of righting great wrongs, but Wikipedia operates based on what is verifiable about subjects. You've failed to provide any sources that pass Wikipedia's guidelines for reliability. —C.Fred (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the fact that the software in question is flagged and removed if you use the malware scanner of a leading IT security company and that this IT security company provides a website and a forum where they explain why they flag and remove the scam software is as verifiable as it gets in this area. If this doesn't meet the Wikipedia standards of verifiability there will never be a chance to mention any facts about this company in the Wikipedia since the New York Times obviously has better things to do than to write atricles about 1000 small scam companies. But in this case the article about the company should be removed completely since it sounds a) like an advertisement and b) most of the other information in the article has ZERO sources. So my sourced and verfiable edit was reverted but about 50% of the content of the article is completely unsourced and can still remain as it is? Sorry, not credible. --B00nish w4rs (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]