User talk:Zoontag

Welcome!

Hello, Zoontag, 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. JarrahTree 08:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Black Flag, Western Australia, 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. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Black Flag, Western Australia 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. JarrahTree 08:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Zoontag, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Zoontag! 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 Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:23, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Black Flag

The edit history of this article is now getting quite confusing, and your own contributions are showing a limited understanding about what WP:ABOUT.

Perhaps you need to ask for help, rather than adding unsubstantiated material, and also potential material that is inadequately referenced, at the same time calling out other material as being inadequate.

As it is WP:SPA suggests you havent edited other items at all. Try clarifying exactly what it is you hope to do. As it is the Black Flag article now lacks adequate explanation of a number of issues. JarrahTree 01:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Black Flag

Would you computer geeks please find something better to do, I tried adding legitimit information about this area gleaned from a book I read, It's publicized and widely available ans I suggest you geeks read it before telling me the information is unreferenced and unreliable, the Author discovered the Black Flag area and gave the true explanation for the place name which you geeks can't seem to handle. Zoontag (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

geeks could be taken many ways. You are trying to edit a wikipedia article, and when you respond with a poorly spelt response, you could actually ask for help so your point from Sligo can be inserted into the article. That needs help. First WP:AGF and WP:NPA.

First the item you read was: -

Sligo, N. K. (Norman Kenneth); Bridge, Peter J. (Peter John), 1943- (1995), Mates and gold : reminiscences of early Westralian goldfields, 1890-1896 (Annotated and reprinted ed.), Hesperian Press, ISBN 978-0-85905-195-8{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

what could help you, is if you find the page number - your job - you read the book...

and then the words from that page that verify your claim of what he has written.

Btw Landgate [1] claim in their website: Black Flag -

The goldfields townsite of Black Flag, now abandoned, takes its name from the Black Flag gold find, discovered in 1893. The townsite was gazetted in 1897, but it is not known why the place was named Black Flag.

which means that Sligo makes a claim, but others do not record such a claim as something that can be verified.

And that is an important thing about an on-line encyclopedia - there is the need for WP:V and WP:RS for WP:CITE. Thanks. JarrahTree 02:20, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]