User talk:SaltyRooster77

Welcome!

Hello, SaltyRooster77, 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 Oswald Spengler have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to 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. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

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. - DVdm (talk) 22:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought my Oswald Spengler edits were sourced

Were they not sourced? I was using the same source as the one already listed to justify my edits but it was still a source. The information that is currently listed under the Prussianism and Socialism section is very misleading. Spengler considered Marx's thinking to be purely English in character and the description for the part that follows that makes him sound like an advocate for genocide. Spengler was opposed to anti-Semitism and I'm unaware of anything he wrote that indicated he believed non-Germans must be killed. That passage certainly doesn't. It is advocating imperialism and domination but not extermination.

SaltyRooster77 (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC) SaltyRooster77[reply]

Well, if a source is already mentioned elsewhere in an article, you can name the original source with a "name=X" clause (for instance <ref name=X>(original ref)</ref>, and then re-use the same source with <ref name=X />. But beware of the page numbers of course. - DVdm (talk) 23:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No page numbers are currently given and the source I use is the same one that was used for the section I was editing, [14], which is the book itself, Prussianism and Socialism. If you'd like me to add page numbers, I can. Would it be alright for me to make my change again/undo your edit now that I have explained this? If there's anything else I need to do, explain, or elaborate on, I will. SaltyRooster77 (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC) SaltyRooster77[reply]

Please indent all talk page messages as outlined in wp:THREAD and wp:INDENT — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks.

Yes, feel free to undo my undo, but then please also add the source information, and briefly mention your talk page in the edit summary. No problem at all. Happy editing! - DVdm (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! What sort of source information would you recommend other than what is currently given, which is the book the quotes come from? SaltyRooster77 (talk) 23:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC) SaltyRooster77[reply]

On second thought, I think that the edit is sufficiently backed by the context, which in turn is properly backed by sources, so we can leave it as it is now. If/when someone else objects, you'll notice soon enough

. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 10:07, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]