User talk:Eldorado12300

Welcome!
Hello, Eldorado12300, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to The Political Compass does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below 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
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 have any questions, check out Questions. Again, welcome! — Smuckola(talk) 21:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)


 * In addition to all the unencyclopedic violations I already named (WP:TRIVIA WP:OR WP:UNDUE), we'll also add WP:NPOV and WP:NOTNEWS. This is a totally unenecyclopedic subject and style of corporate promotional writing altogether. If you are affiliated with the subject for promotion, you must disclose it immediately WP:COI. — Smuckola(talk) 21:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)


 * FYI, repeated reverting is called edit warring WP:3RR and users can be blocked for that. Regarding your account, you just created it while knowing advanced wikicode, so if you already had a previous Wikipedia account, then you also must disclose it here immediately. — Smuckola(talk) 21:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Editing
Hello! Thank you for reaching out! I am new to this and may not know exactly what I am doing. Do you mind helping me learn how to edit objectively. I would like to say, I am in no way affiliated with the content I edited, but that field/circle is something I have been following very closely for a long time. I have been independently been researching modern political online spaces and that content is at the forefront of a larger political entity so I wanted to start there. I plan on adding to the history of many likeminded entities and expand the public knowledge on such topics. I do not have a wikipedia account, I simply copied the format of a previous edit and changed out the variables for the article I linked. Would you be so kind to help me edit the entry properly so I can start laying out the information properly Eldorado12300 (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi there! Wow, a user who's sincere to the project and starts out with wikicode skills. That's rare and impressive. I really hate having to warn people just because of Wikipedia's pointless trap of inviting everyone in the world, but with absolutely no orientation and training. This requires an elaborate long-term certification process that doesn't exist. Anyway. In general, writing neutral prose is hard, but writing neutral prose about politics is wicked hard. The hardest. I've given up on a lot of that. I write a lot of corporate and marketing stuff though. All things flow from WP:NPOV. That contains a lot, and it links to countless other things which require many readings. NPOV is a pillar for how to even think about writing an encyclopedia. The other main pillar is reliable sources WP:RS. Your source you gave is a humorous listicle, so yeah sometimes those are a valid situational source like for ranking a video game, or for showing how many top tens a game is included in. But for establishing a subject's notability (WP:N) upon the world, you want a standalone focus. And you state the case in due weight of the surrounding content WP:UNDUE. So how's that for starters? Hm, maybe find some controversial political article that's of "good" status and see how they did it, like some exceptionally vile Republican or Lost Cause of the Confederacy. — Smuckola(talk) 05:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, haha You are absolutely right on that front, there should definitely be a certification process, or at least a course! I apologize for my pervious lack of attention when editing, it really is not an easy format to work with. I think you may be on to something regarding steering clear of politics! I have been reading more into WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE and it is quite difficult to navigate such a subject objectively. However, I would like to try nonetheless as now I've made it a personal goal to learn. Below I have re-written the edit I wanted to add. I do not want to do anything without your critique and approval before hand, as your experience speaks for itself. I removed all the subjective language and cut out any unnecessary text. In terms of a source, I found an interview that I feel is much more reliable. Please tell me what you think!
 * @the_political_compass is an Instagram page that has gained popularity for its approach to political commentary. The account uses memes and humorous illustrations to comment on current events and political figures from various countries and ideological backgrounds. It has 325k followers on Instagram, and a Discord community of 5000 members, as of March 2023. In addition to its Instagram presence, @the_political_compass has been featured in various media outlets and has collaborated with other social media accounts and influencers.[17]
 * https://www.librarystack.org/chatting-with-the_political_compass/ Eldorado12300 (talk) 17:28, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Like I said, that whole subject is extremely flimsy as presented. All you said is basically "Instagram accounts exist". It's like WP:FANCRUFT. You have given no WP:RS at all, and this librarystack is even worse than the last source, both inadmissible. Why did you allege in prose that reliable sources exist, but not provide them? That's literally the entire point of an encyclopedia. Read WP:N for the burden and scope of demonstrating notability (and what it is WP:NOT), and WP:RS for the instrument of proving it. You mentioned that you "feel" it is reliable, and this is exactly what feelings get us. An encyclopedia is the opposite of feelings. If you read WP:RS, which it doesn't seem you have and which everyone should a zillion times, you see that we need a *secondary* reliable source, not a primary source, which consists of a professional grade journalist with a publicly known reputation and a publicly known external editorial review and oversight process within the organization. Sometimes there could be a veteran journalist who went solo, or went retired, or whatever. There are actual lists of reliable sources, but you haven't stated any. The source you gave is a WP:PRIMARY source, where we take the word of the subject directly, so that's only for situational source usage to back up trivia and uncontroversial stuff, not to assert the entire basis of notability which is already lacking in the entire rest of this very flimsy article. The site traffic statistics are meaningless and unmaintainable as per WP:TRIVIA and WP:RECENTISM. An encyclopedia is not a statistics counter. We don't just create endless realtime homework for unknowable volunteers forever. So that sentence is deleted and the rest are meaningless. Stuff exists. — Smuckola(talk) 03:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @the_political_compass is an Instagram page that has gained popularity for its approach to political commentary. The account uses memes and humorous illustrations to comment on current events and political figures from various countries and ideological backgrounds.
 * https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/how-discord-went-mainstream-influencers/584671/
 * I only added the follower count as I was copying the format of the other edit regarding the Subreddit community, it seemed appropriate to include it. But you are right, removing it makes more sense! Eldorado12300 (talk) 17:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)