User talk:SriSriSriPatrick

Welcome!

Hello, SriSriSriPatrick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Doug Weller talk 12:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We don't use email as a source

See WP:VERIFY. Besides the fact it could be fake (which I'm not saying about yours), it's not reliable published. Doug Weller talk 12:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hi SriSriSriPatrick! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia — it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 09:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citing source - a guide you need to follow

Help:Referencing for beginners is brilliant. Note that we really need at the very least author, publishing date (making sure the date reflects the date the last edition was published, some dates are reprint dates a century late), publisher and page number. But if you use our tools, most of that except the page number will be inserted automatically. I reverted your addition of a frankly ridiculous self-published book self-published by AuthorHouse. Doug Weller talk 09:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mógilsá moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mógilsá, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. John B123 (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sri Chinmoy Giant Statue Controversy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sri Chinmoy Giant Statue Controversy 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/Sri Chinmoy Giant Statue Controversy 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. Vexations (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sliema’s Sri Chinmoy Statue Controversy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sliema’s Sri Chinmoy Statue Controversy 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/Sliema’s Sri Chinmoy Statue Controversy 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. BostonMensa (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]