User talk:AFrankTaylor

Welcome!
Hello, AFrankTaylor, 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 to the page Icarus has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to 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. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

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:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

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 Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Haploidavey (talk) 15:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Icarus
Hello, AFrank Taylor, and thanks for the note. Before you proceed any further, please take a good look at the links in the welcome message above. One of the most basic rules in Wikipedia editing is the absolute requirement that any material added to articles is sourced to reliable, highly informed, peer-reviewed sources by experts in the field most relevant to the topic. I don't doubt your physics; but you could be a second Einstein, and we'd still have to revert your change because it's uncited. And because it's uncited, it's WP:original research, which is banned completely from the site. Best wishes, Haploidavey (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Just to be absolutely clear; for your edit to be kept, every part of it would have to have been based on what had already been published by a reliable, specialist source on Icarus; and that source would have to have said all that business about mountains and brittle wax, with direct reference to Icarus. Haploidavey (talk) 17:33, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

You might also reconsider the relevance of attempting a scientific analysis on the catastrophic failure of wings secured by wax to a human torso. It didn't actually happen. It's myth. It's made up. It has nothing to do with aeospatial science. Haploidavey (talk) 17:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)