User talk:31.185.239.148

The burden of proof
Regarding your edits on Bucksburn such as this with the edit summary "I added some more information. Please look the edits up on google if they don’t seem reliable.", I ask you to have a look at Verifiability. You will see that it is the editor who adds information that is responsible for providing citations. And remember, references not only verify the factual validity of a statement, but also its notability. Not everything that is true is noteworthy.

I will add that changing the population from 8,131 to 8,132 (and back again) does not instill confidence. All edits are open to being challenged, but many are not challenged. If you look at the reverts here, my advice would be:
 * do not haphazardly link terms such as "Deer", and the years "2015" and "2019", if you want the edit to be taken seriously;
 * avoid changing "suburb" to "large suburb", which invites the challenge "define large";
 * avoid picturesque claims such as "the Deer that drink out of it" and "It’s known for having stags run up the Burn";
 * simpler claims such as the presence of schools, and businesses like McDonalds and Lidl are much more likely to go unchallenged, unless another editor finds them unreasonable or suspect, or knows them to be false.

(It makes sense to Wikilink "burn", but the precise way to do it is to say "burn"

Don't let this dissuade you from editing the encyclopedia here. Consider it advice on how to get your edits to stick. Sincerely  signed, Willondon (talk)  21:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I can see you're sincere. I'll give you some time to work on it, before jumping in with reverts. Cheers. signed, Willondon (talk) 21:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Bucksburn, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. xRENEGADEx ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 07:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguating links
When you add a Wikilink with the and  markers, it sometimes points to a disambiguation page, like this: Woodside. (On my screen) Wikilinks render in blue, unless it's a disambiguation page, which renders in orange. This requires the reader to select what they guess might be the most likely article it was meant to point to. When editing, you can use the "Show preview" function to check that you haven't added any links which require disambiguating.

Take a look at my edit here on Bucksburn. Instead of a link to a general term, they now point to a specific instance, so the reader doesn't have to guess which was meant. You can use the "|" pipe symbol to distinguish the actual name of the specific article from what you want to appear in the text of the link.

I notice you are seeing a number of reverts still. Don't get discouraged. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and it's true that "anyone can edit Wikipedia", but what ends up in an article is shaped by a community with a long tradition of conventions as to what makes a useful article, and how information is added. Don't hesitate to seek advice at the Teahouse, or on an editor's talk page (e.g. User talk:Willondon). Cheers. signed, Willondon (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

January 2022
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 2601:240:CD0A:3938:B55E:9950:4CEE:72C2 (talk) 14:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Your edit to Bucksburn has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. MacAddct1984 (talk &#124; contribs) 17:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Information.svg Hello, I'm GiantSnowman. An edit that you recently made to Tomáš Černý seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! GiantSnowman 19:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)