User talk:AnthonyKluska

Welcome

Hello, AnthonyKluska, 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 facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Grayfell (talk) 04:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, 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

Capitalism

Hello AnthonyKluska, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to Capitalism. Unfortunately, I had to undo four of your recent edits to the article, because the lead is an introduction to the article, and is not the place to attempt to start making your first changes to the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and works through consensus. I see that you've already gotten some pushback from several editors, including very experienced User:Grayfell (who helped me early in my Wikipedia career with pushback on some of my edits), as well as from two other editors.

In general, it's better to start with small changes to the body of the article first, taking care to observe the key Wikipedia principles of Verifiability, neutral point of view, and due weight, and then see how other editors react to your changes. After getting consensus among editors on changes to the body, only then should you attempt changes to the WP:LEAD, following the principle of WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY.

When you get pushback from other editors about article content, the thing to do is stop editing the article, and raise a discussion on the article Talk page, instead. The Talk page is where editors go, to discuss changes to the article, and to attempt to arrive at a consensus about the content. This is where you are now, so if you wish to continue editing the Capitalism article, my recommendation to you, would be to go to the Talk page. You can get there by going to Capitalism, and clicking the "Talk" tab top left.

If you have any questions, feel free to {{reply}} to me below, or contact me on my Talk page. In addition, you can seek help from an experienced user at any time, by adding a new section to your talk page, and including the token {{Help me}} somewhere in your message. Once again, welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope you enjoy it here, and decide to stay! Mathglot (talk) 06:02, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for reaching out and being kind.

I did add  some ideas to the talk page. And I will allow someone to take those ideas and edit them instead of me.

I can also look for other articles to edit that are a bit less advanced. In order to cut my teeth. AnthonyKluska (talk) 23:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. That sounds like a good plan! Feel free to reach out on my Talk page, any time you have a question. Also, you can post a question here on your Talk page, and add {{Help me}} somewhere in your message, and someone will be along to respond. Happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

collapsed invalid 3rr warning template

Your recent editing history at Capitalism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. TFD (talk) 05:43, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed BITEy template. Also, an invalid one; there was no 3rr violation. Concerns about good-faith but perhaps overeager changes at Capitalism have already been addressed at the article, and in talk sections above. Mathglot (talk) 07:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Joe Pyfer, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 08:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi perhaps you can help me with sourcing. 1) i know for a fact he he trains at Marquez mma (i train there we're tream mates). 2) in his interview with joe rogan on the JRE podcast he cited john Marquez and Jonavin web has his coachs. 3) if you watch his walk outs in the ufc neither of he migliarese brothers corner him. But he as always been cornered by Marquez/web.

I think citing 2) is the best option but i am not sure the best way to cite that. AnthonyKluska (talk) 14:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Researched how to cite interviews cited AnthonyKluska (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AnthonyKluska, good day. I have reverted your edit again on the said above page and pls do not add it back until you can find source as per info here. You can add source by using the horizontal format of Template:CiteWeb if the source is from the web. Source needs to be independent and reliable for verification - this means any source which related to the subject such as official web site, interview, social media are considered NOT independent and reliable. If you see any article from newspapers, books, or MMA sources such as MMA Fighting, MMA Junkie, Cageside Press, Sherdog and etc then you can use source. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:43, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to understand how is joe pyfer saying in an interview who is coaches are not reliabile? AnthonyKluska (talk) 00:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok understand what's happening here. Wikipedia is giving secondary sources precedence over primary sources. That's backwards and it's now wonder Wikipedia is a terrible source for anything with tons of biased data.

If sherdog writes an article citing jre. I could use the sherdog article but not jre itself ok wows. AnthonyKluska (talk) 00:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please check my source before i post again. https://www.tapology.com/fightcenter/fighters/144942-joseph-pyfer this says Marquez mma and ufc does an article on joe pyfer citing john Marquez as his head coach https://www.ufc.com/news/joe-pyfer-doesnt-care-about-experience

Sherdog still has balance but it's outdated info (how does wiki determine which sources to use. The one that agree woth pyfers own words or the one that doesn't) AnthonyKluska (talk) 00:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Joe Pyfer is 2-0 in the UFC with two first round KO’s. A stand out on Dana White’s Contender Series, Joe capitalized on the opportunity with a very powerful start to his UFC career. Training out of Marquez MMA and Webb Fitness & MMA, Pyfer is among the bes" thttps://cagesidepress.com/2023/05/18/joe-pyfer-featured-in-new-journey-to-the-ufc-documentary-talks-childhood-trauma/ AnthonyKluska (talk) 01:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.espn.com/mma/fighter/_/id/4684135/joe-pyfer says the team is Marquez mma AnthonyKluska (talk) 01:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anthonly Kluska, I saw you edit on the said page and removed on the sources (ESPN - associated with UFC so both of the sources are considered not independent). Just to clarify, it is not Wikipedia background on sourcing, it is because the main policy of Wikipedia is base don verification the info from independent, reliable sources. If the primary source (from the subject) states the info, then the info might/might not be reliable as once can say anything about oneself and sources that have a relation/connection/affiliation also considered not independent nor reliable as relationship sources can say anything about the subject (that is why ESPN on UFC info is considered not independent as they have 7 year business contract). However, to say that a extremely small info of primary source from the subject can be used if and only if the info is only about the subject which can be found elsewhere and is relevant - which in most cases only one or 2 info of the whole article. I thank you for your contribution and if you need any info or any assistance on editing MMA related articles or anything about Wikipedia, pls pop to my talk page as I am here to help. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you. I find this process Kafkaesque at the moment but I know it's not your fault. I appreciate the assistance in the matter despite my frustration. AnthonyKluska (talk) 02:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anthonly Kluska, I understand your frustration as learning to edit Wikipedia is at times very difficult because new editors do not know the guidelines and norms and in addition do not know where or who to turn to when help is needed. For almost all of us, including me, it is a steep learning curve until one editor was kind enough to provide me Wikipedia guidelines link and I knew how to navigate and find more other guidelines. Even today, I am one of the NPPS (new page/article reviewer) trainer and CVUA (counter vandalism) trainer with have more than 200K edits, I still learn new guidelines and norms in Wikipedia. I understand you have registered since Sept 2019 - see HERE, but you have only 19 main space edit. Thurs, I would considered you are new editor. I suggest you to take a short program - WP:TWA (about 90 mins of your time) so you can familiar yourself with some fundamental Wikipedia guidelines. Although the writing format/target audience is aimed at teenagers, it is "extremely" useful info for ANY new editors for I have taken the very same program when I started and I recommend it to all new editors who are interested to edit Wikipedia. You can ALWAYS come to me if you need any assistance or you can also go to Wikipedia:Teahouse and raise any questions about editing and experienced Tea House host(s)/ editors will answer answer your questions and provide you the help needed. Once again, thank you for your contribution. Stay safe and best. (BTW: I learnt a new word "Kafkaesque" from you today - a world derived from Franz Kafka - thank you :). Cassiopeia talk 08:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]