User talk:AlidPedian

Hello, AlidPedian, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Chongkian (talk) 03:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

Finding your way around

Editing articles

Getting help

Frequently asked questions
Cheatsheet
Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
Help pages
Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

Community Portal
Join a WikiProject
Follow Wikipedia etiquette
Practice civility
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! AlidPedian, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:00, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi AlidPedian! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, How to request the rename of category?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Muhammad Hassan Ilyas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Muhammad Hassan Ilyas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Hassan Ilyas until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:31, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello, I'm Apaugasma. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Khawla al-Hanafiyya, 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. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 21:50, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this needs any reliable source, because, it is obvious that the proper Arabic transliteration is "Umm-al", instead of "Umm" or "Umm-e", which is more Persianized and Urduized. AlidPedian (talk) 09:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In Arabic the name Muhammad normally does not take the definite article al-. But on Wikipedia it is more generally necessary to cite sources, because what is obvious for one person may not be obvious for another. It also avoids editors making honest mistakes. Surely something like the correct form of a personal name should be easily found in reliable sources.

Our mechanism to deal with unsourced information in Wikipedia articles is to assume that it is verifiable until an editor challenges and/or removes it, at which point it may only be reinserted with a reference to a reliable source. That is, the WP:BURDEN to provide a source is on the editor who would like the information to be included. In this way, the things that are really obvious to all can stay unsourced without ever being challenged, while those things that are not obvious to some will at some point get challenged and eventually be corroborated with a source.

Of course, it's important to remain reasonable with these things. Opinions on how to deal with it also vary among editors: see the essays Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue and Wikipedia:You do need to cite that the sky is blue. But ultimately, the relevant policy by which everyone must abide is WP:BURDEN (beware: WP:BURDEN is a necessary, but not a sufficient reason for inclusion; there are other reasons for not including something in an article, and the decision to include depends upon content policy and consensus between editors).

I hope this helps, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 10:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But, please co-operate with me if i made any mistake on Wikipedia, there are so many things that i have to learn here, Thanks. AlidPedian (talk) 10:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikipedia has a very steep learning curve. It's completely normal for a beginner to feel kind of lost in the multitude of norms and rules. The best advice I have is to listen to and follow the guidance of more experienced editors, and to thoroughly read and re-read every Wikipedia: or WP: link they throw at you. After a while, it will become more familiar, and things will become a lot easier.

The one thing that keeps making it difficult for some beginner or intermediate editors is when they think they understand some complex Wikipedia policy, while in reality they completely misunderstand it. That's why it's important both to really read all Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, and to observe how these policies and guidelines are applied by experienced editors.

In the beginning, this will often not go your way: articles you create will be deleted because they do not meet WP:Notability, information you add will be reverted because it does not meet WP:Verifiability or WP:Neutral point of view (this is an especially difficult one!). This can be hard to accept at times, but accepting it is precisely what will make you grow as an editor.

In general, it is almost expected of beginners to make many mistakes. The point is to learn from them, and to not make them again ... too often

. We all still make mistakes, even the most experienced of editors. The good thing about Wikipedia is that every edit can be easily reverted, so it's very hard to actually break something (see Wikipedia:Can't break it).

The most important thing that you can break though is your relationship with other editors: the hardest thing on Wikipedia, as well as the single most important thing, is to stay cool, to remain friendly to other editors at all times (even when they are not too friendly!). You're right, we're here to collaborate, and so even when unpleasant things happen the most important point is to focus on being constructive. If you can do that, you will be a truly great Wikipedia editor! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 11:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, i really appreciate it.

I would try my best here. AlidPedian (talk) 12:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alvi

Hello AlidPedian. I have reverted your edit to Alvi and wanted to give you some feedback.

Disambiguation pages are different from other pages. They are merely navigation pages to help readers find specific existing articles quickly and easily, rather like the index of a book. They should not have content that does not already exist in an article. The text that you placed at the beginning of Alvi could go into an article, but you would need to have a reliable source. If you would like to read more about disambiguation pages, see wp:Disambiguation and MOS:DAB. Leschnei (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]