User talk:Nyc5475

July 2021

Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 03:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nyc5475, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Nyc5475! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like GoingBatty (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to LB&SCR E2 class. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 23:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

This is your only warning; if you create an inappropriate page again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. aeschylus (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10 July 2022

I undid this because I don't think that Railway Preservation News is a Reliable Source (RS). I can tell you why if you care, but expect it to be thrown away by anyone who notices it. Since the source isn’t any good anything that it backs is probably no good either. Moon Joon (talk) 16:05, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to GE Evolution Series. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. The claim of the "fastest freight train ever" is not supported by the sources you added. This makes you claim original research. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed that this train was the "fastest freight train ever." Don't edit before you have even read the edit. Nyc5475 (talk) 21:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I read the edit and the sources. Don't add nonsense to Wikipedia, please. The sources do NOT support what you are claiming. Do not restore original research to the article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use ad hominems. You would know it wasn't nonsense if you read the sources and compared the top speed of Mercitalia fast to the record run.

What I have written is not original research. If the purpose of wikipedia is to disseminate free and reliable information, I think they should restore the objective truth and run it on the main page. Nyc5475 (talk) 21:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is original research, and you will be blocked if you continue adding it to Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So this speed record doesn't count because it was a runaway? Nyc5475 (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can't say "this is the fastest freight train ever" without a source that says as much. You are combining different sources together to draw a conclusion not explicitly stated in any of them. This is original research. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on GE Evolution Series. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]