User talk:86.24.250.193

June 2021
Hello, I'm LizardJr8. I noticed that you made a change to an article, COVID-19 anti-lockdown protests in the United Kingdom, 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. LizardJr8 (talk) 14:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. LizardJr8 (talk) 14:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello LizardJr8. Please read the below before posting any further objections.

It has been stated in this article written by Damien Gayle, a journalist working for The Guardian newspaper, that there were "hundreds of thousands of people taking part."

However, despite this, you have repeatedly removed this information from the page, under the false claim that no source has been provided for the edit that has been made. I suggest that you refrain from removing this edit, on the basis that no reliable source has been provided, when a verifiable and reliable source has in fact been provided, instead discussing any concerns you might have on the article's talk page first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.24.250.193 (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Your comments here notwithstanding, the comment added by User:LizardJr8 above accurately reflect your history at the article. Your protest above, and at the talk page, misstate your actions at the article. This has already been provided (with diffs) at the Talk page of the article, here. Your edits at the article were in direct contradiction to numerous, impeccable sources, regardless what you intimate here, or at the article talk page. The history of the article contains the record of your actions, and the article Talk page discussion summarize them. Whether inadvertent, or intentional, I cannot say; but your claims are false. Mathglot (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The things you say just aren't true. You consistently fail to respond to the points I raise. It's like talking right past you, or at a brick wall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.24.250.193 (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

How Wikipedia works
It's clear to me from your edits at Talk:COVID-19 anti-lockdown protests in the United Kingdom that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works, and I wanted to explain it to you. This was clear from numerous comments of yours, but this one was brief, so I'll quote it in its entirety:

Wikipedia works on the basis of summarizing published material that we find in independent, secondary, reliable sources, like major newspapers, magazines, and reliable websites. The truth is, what you saw with your own eyes does not count for anything at Wikipedia. The reason for that, is that everybody would just start writing what they claimed they saw, and the whole online-encyclopedia thing would collapse in a pack of lies created by people pushing their own point of view. Nobody is saying you are doing that, but I'm sure you see the problem: if everybody can put anything into Wikipedia, and just say, "I saw it", it would soon be completely useless. If the size of the crowd is what you say it is, no problem: just find reliable sources that agree with you, summarize or quote them, and add a citation (see Help:Footnotes for how to do that).

One side effect of Wikipedia's requirement of published, reliable sources, is that if all the sources get it wrong, and you and a few thousand of your best friends know the truth, then Wikipedia prints what is in the reliable sources, and ignores the truth. That doesn't happen very often, but it probably does happen sometimes. The way to fix that, is to get your point of view printed in a newspaper or magazine by a reporter, and then cite that newspaper in the article; that is allowed. But you cannot put what you personally know to be true in the article; that is prohibited for reasons explained at WP:Verifiability.

I didn't make the rules, but I believe they are good ones, and I will try to make sure the article follows the guidelines. If you can deal with those rules, great; welcome to Wikipedia! If you can't, well, your career here will probably be a short one. If you would like a second opinion, you are welcome to try the WP:Tea house, or the WP:Help desk; there are plenty of people there who are willing to help out. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 22:17, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Replying to talk threads
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button OOUI_JS_signature_icon_LTR.svg located above the edit window.

Additionally, please don't insert your reply into the middle of someone else's comment. This not only makes it difficult to see who wrote what, it makes it very difficult to repair, and sometimes the only solution is to go back to an earlier version of the page, which removes all the later comments after that point.

Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)