User talk:Argument cat

Hello! I'm Belbury. Your recent edit(s) to the page Megalith appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 09:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My English isn't very good and I just couldn't think of a more accurate expression. This may be a brazen request, but it would be a great help if you could fix the mistake instead of reverting it. Argument cat (talk) 09:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the edit summary, describing Shimao as a "megalithic settlement" appears to be incorrect, to me! The Shimao article doesn't use the term, and the photos in it don't appear to show megalithic structures. Belbury (talk) 10:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So how can we describe these ruins? At the very least, there are many signs of human habitation. Argument cat (talk) 10:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Out-of-place artifact. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you. Hypnôs (talk) 10:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll add the source Argument cat (talk) 12:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Late Tang dynasty

I recently disambiguated a link you made to Late Tang dynasty, which points to a disambiguation page. [1] I wasn't sure which of the two options was correct, though. I picked Later Tang. I wonder if you could visit the disambiguation page, and make sure I picked the right one. Thank you. _signed,Willondon (talk) 13:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the former, referring to the end of the Tang Dynasty. But it seems I worded it poorly. Thank you for letting me know. Argument cat (talk) 00:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a curtain that opens and closes depending on which of two cords you pull. I don't know what it is, but when a choice is exactly 50/50, I'm 100% sure to pick the wrong one. _signed,Willondon (talk) 01:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a lot better than me, who chooses the wrong option even with a 90/10 chance lol Argument cat (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just for your information

@Argument cat For you, I have updated RfC question as per WP:RfC to neutral wording. RfC question need to be neutrally worded about content and not about individual users. This is just for your information. Bookku (talk) 08:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your last edit @ Talk:Out-of-place artifact

Suggesting to consider following points:

You said

..I didn't pay much attention to sources because I thought spreading knowledge was a worthy priority. Your comment made me realize that it is not just only the body of knowledge or information itself that is important in now. ..

Being collaborative project to depend on WP:RS is structural need and limitation both for Wikipedia and Wikipedians have to live with. Huge amount of negotiation and proving (and many times still not being accepted by community) to add even a single word can be very normal.

If you noticed, at the RFC other user said "..I appreciate the notification, but I'm afraid that I am out of my depth here in this conversation. I am not well versed in the cited secondary sources being discussed. ..". Many times people need very long time to study and go through and react knowledgeably and we need to give time. Creating RfC, of course decision largely remains yours, without having enough users knowing nuances may not help but waiting for another day before creating the RfC may help more at times.

Waiting for another day:For example my suggestions on RfC etiquette though are very constructive other user did not agree on pretext generally users do not read help pages properly and even some do not use ideally. Did I argue back, no I left it for another day. During COVID times I wanted importance of Mask to be more stressed then what was there in the article but other users did not agree. This is collaborative project, its not that every time other users will agree. Many times waiting for another day can be better strategy.
Last but not least: I suggest read Improving your arguments in the future
Foot note for others: This is mentoring advice not for being used against this user in any personal dispute with this user.

Happy editing

Bookku (talk) 07:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]