User talk:Basilesm04

BRD

Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and the dispute should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it or an alternate version. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 03:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hi, can you please stop taking down my edit. I have an essay that goes along with this edit. If my edit offends you, please just wait two weeks before you bring it down. If you keep taking down my edit, I will fail this essay. Therefore, please stop! Basilesm04 (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! School assignments do not excuse you from Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I advise you to read the pages Vaselineeeeeeee linked above. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 01:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the article. In the article, it states that you should discuss. However, instead of discussing, Vaseline has brought our conflict to another page. How should I fix this? Basilesm04 (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you want to discuss my information I added, can you please tell me what you want me to change? Basilesm04 (talk) 02:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From what I'm seeing, I have two comments. We probably don't need a specific recipe with exact measurements for a general food that can certainly be made different ways. Also, nothing you added is cited with reliable sources; it needs to be. However, I'm pinging Vaselineeeeeeee to see if he has anything to add. Bsoyka (talk) 02:09, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By the way (I must have skipped over this), of course the conflict was taken to a talk page. Where else would discussion occur? Bsoyka (talk) 02:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just between him and I on my talk page and not on Wikpedia:Teahouse. Read what I said again. I stated that he brought it to another page instead of us just talking it out. Basilesm04 (talk) 02:45, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think mentioning this in the Teahouse was a bad idea at all. The community is the foundation of Wikipedia, and it's absolutely never a bad thing to ask for a little help. Besides, content disputes should never be explicitly confined to one-on-one discussion, as articles aren't solely made by two-person teams, and other contributors are here too. Bsoyka (talk) 03:36, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Although there is nothing wrong with discussing the ingredients and cooking techniques for a dish, as long as that content is referenced to the highest quality reliable independent sources, we should not include detailed recipes, per WP:NOTGUIDE, which makes it clear that Wikipedia is not a cookbook. The article can incorporate references to reliable sources that include recipes, especially those by notable chefs, and when they include discussion of the dish outside the immediate context of a recipe, but it should be clear that an article about a dish should not consist of advice in Wikipedia's voice about how to cook the dish. Cullen328 (talk) 05:04, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sinply put, your recipe (unreferenced): No. A recipe or recipes mentioned in relaible source cookbooks: Yes, especially if that is in the context of pointing out differences between locations (Italian versus US). David notMD (talk) 09:29, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting: A good place to add a recipe would be wikibooks:Cookbook - however I would recommend reading wikibooks:Cookbook:Policy first. casualdejekyll 13:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Checking "plug Wikibooks to new editor" off of my bucket list ^[Humor] casualdejekyll 13:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]