User talk:70.27.20.8

December 2023
Hello, I'm AntiDionysius. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Super Dave Osborne, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 13:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)


 * DID YOU NOT SEE THAT NAME OF ALBERT BROOKS IS CORRECT AND SHOWED HIS WIKIPEDIA PAGE ??? - YOU FAR TOO MANY KNOW NOTHING EDITING PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN A FEW THINGS AND STOP SO MANY OF THESE TERRIBLY WRONG REMOVALS / REVERTS - THANK YOU 70.27.20.8 (talk) 13:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Three things. First, the article Super Dave Osborne is not about Bob Einstein, it's about the character he plays. Information about the actor's personal life belongs on his page; you'll notice it's already there.
 * Secondly, even if you were just copying over information corroborated by another page, you would still need to source it in the article you were copying it into, even if you just used the same source. Simply saying "it's on another Wikipedia page" isn't enough; things need to be verifiable from the article they're in.
 * Third, please try to remain civil in your interactions with other editors. Make your objections to the things they do, rather than disparaging their character or intelligence. There is also really no need to type in all caps or bold; regular text can be read just fine. Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Sir / Madam ( ??? ), what you respond to above is rather sadly odd / strange as so many ' facts ' entered on Wikipedia show no known reference, you must know and be aware of that alone and if not then just check any sports personage along with many military personages - Should not a brother of any person with a Wikipedia entry be mentioned on the other's page - ??? - There is too much like this everywhere on Wikipedia, especially in sports and military entries, and people like all of those of us who are always changing / correcting / updating / etc., are not at all happy to see correct / proper / accurate entries reverted / removed - One other main problem is where none of you " editors " appear to know very much at all about the people you are always reverting / removing these far too many entries on or ever take any time whatsoever on your own to even check anything - ??? - Therefore, why would you just remove what was entered on Albert Brooks and not verify this yourself rather than expect others to do so for you and why can he not be mentioned on the page in question - ??? - We knew both gentlemen over time being in television / radio news reporting since the 1960s and feel they would wish that to be true - This is not at all right or anywhere near professional and needs to be addressed as it would / should be in any normal businesslike manner - Lastly, this ' Jacona ' person ( man / woman ??? ) never had the common decency to respond to various appeals to do so on the changes to wrongful name errors on ' k.d. lang ' page where her name is spelled incorrectly a number of ways from top to bottom and Jacona even entered a wrong name for her as well - ?!?!? - Why is that no-nothing person even allowed to make any changes - ??? - Thank you for your response however the real problem as above lies with you Wikipedia ' editor people ', and really needs to be looked into and changed and now would be best for all concerned. (( Finally, with respect to words in all ' CAPS ' / ' UPPERS ' this derives from their use in military messages / orders from before 1900 to get the attention of those who do not seem to be with the program. )) 70.27.20.8 (talk) 01:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It is true that there exists information on Wikipedia that is unsourced. That's a problem. But that problem doesn't get better by adding more stuff without sources; it gets worse.
 * If you see some unsourced information, you can tag it with a tag, so someone can either find a citation for it or remove it. But its existence does not free users from the obligation to provide sources for new content they add to articles. The burden is on the person who adds info to cite it, and the addition can be reversed if they do not. -- AntiDionysius (talk) 11:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)