User talk:Decorationsathome

Siyar Bahadurzada
Hi Decorationsathome, Greetings, I have reverted your edits on the above page as as per WikiProject Mixed martial arts - "Never add future bouts. The purpose of the record table is to provide a quick account of a fighter's past career, not to speculate about his/her future. Upcoming bouts that have been officially announced can only be mentioned within the body text at the end of the Mixed martial arts career section, provided that they are notable (covered by reliable third-party sources." If you have any questions or anything I could help, pls let me know. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:03, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
Hello, I'm Wario-Man. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Tajiks seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Tajiks. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 17:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Seems you don't read my messages and edit summaries. Britannica does not pass as an expert source. See User_talk:Doug_Weller/Archive_44 It means any editor can remove it from any article at any time. So there is no reason to move it above Richard Nelson Frye's opinion and other more specialized sources (see WP:WEIGHT). Seriously what's the point of your edits on that article? --Wario-Man (talk) 07:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

The point of putting it up above an American's personal view, is that it involves several people first of all. Not just a historian from America, who knows nothing about the culture and the links from these ethnic groups and their ancestries. No source has ever said that ethnic Persians have intermingled with Bactrians and implies that all of them are mixed between each other. It certainly can suggest that Bactrians as the ancestors of Tajiks did intermingle, but cannot be allowed to state that all Tajiks have come from intermingling between Bactrians and ethnic Persians, as many are actually directly descended only from Bactrians and Sogdians if this "historian" actually know history and without your bias edits to prove power instead of factual history. Please consider what I am saying and that is what will show you why I put the Britannica as a more resourceful reference to their origins above the historian's claim. It is a very sensitive topic to Tajiks and must be represented rightfully.


 * "The point of putting it up above an American's personal view, is that it involves several people first of all. Not just a historian from America, who knows nothing about the culture and the links from these ethnic groups and their ancestries."
 * "(...) and without your bias edits to prove power instead of factual history."
 * Looking at the above, and the overal compelling editorial evidence (WP:TENDENTIOUS), I'm not really sure whether you are actually here to build this encyclopedia. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)