User talk:86.163.90.213

Hokaglish
Hello, I'm GermanJoe. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''As the content seems quite complicated and disputed, it would probably best to start a thread providing your sources and arguments on the article's talkpage Talk:Hokaglish. Best regards.'' GermanJoe (talk) 13:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

There is no source because this term is completely made up. I'm Fil-Chi and I lived there. No one calls it by this term, as this term does not exist. You are propagating fiction with fake sources.

Ideally, that page should be deleted, or simply referred to as Philippine Hokkien.

You are asking for published sources for something that does not exist. Don't you see that you're asking for something impossible? If the term does not exist, then that means there can't be genuine, academic or reliable sources of it. Look at the "sources" that exist in the page, it's all really from one person. That person made up the term. No one calls it that.

There is already a page for Philippine Hokkien. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Hokkien Minimally, the Hokaglish page is redundant.


 * The author is an academic. While the reliance on only 1 author is highly problematic (agree), academics are usually considered reliable sources. And the author's publications are based and sourced on further works from other academics and reliable publications. Three quick points about Wikipedia editing:
 * Please use the article talkpage Talk:Hokaglish for further discussion.
 * If you believe the topic is non-notable or "made up": any editor can nominate such an article for deletion. But please make sure to read WP:GNG and WP:AfD first, if you want to do so.
 * Lastly, please do not edit-war about disputed content with multiple reverts. I will leave a specific notice about this problem below.


 * I hope these tips are helpful. But please feel free to ask if you have any further questions. GermanJoe (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

In lieu of blocking you for edit warring/disruption, I have protected the page. Use Talk:Hokaglish to lay out your concerns. --Neil N  talk to me 14:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018
Your recent editing history at Hokaglish shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. GermanJoe (talk) 13:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Just because the author made one presentation does not necessarily make them an academic. It does not mean that this is accepted by the academic community or that this is accepted by the community that speaks the language. The absence of sources should prove to you that this term does not exist, and that is your evidence.

There is already a page for the language. I don't know why you are insisting on protecting this term when it's really made up.

How in the world did this page even come to exist in the first place?

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 14:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

WOW. This is why I refuse to let my students use Wikipedia. I'm trying to remove fake stuff on it and you're blocking it.