User talk:Emy Iyke

March 2021
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

She has dual nationality. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

A summary of some important site policies and guidelines

 * All we do here is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary.
 * "Truth" is not the only criteria for inclusion, verifiability is also required.
 * We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
 * Reliable sources typically include: articles from mainstream magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards.  User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided.  Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
 * Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources.  Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for.  In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence.  In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine.
 * We do not give equal validity to topics which reject and are rejected by mainstream academia. For example, our article on Earth does not pretend it is flat, hollow, and/or the center of the universe.

Ian.thomson (talk) 03:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

A note on discretionary sanctions relating to pseudoscience
Ian.thomson (talk) 03:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)


 * You have not provided any citations, references or sources that firmly place the subject for which this article is about as "pseudoscience". Please provide sources.
 * Also, the Big Bang and the evolution of life still constitutes scientific theory. Scientific facts are readily observable within the scientific frame-work, and so thus established. Emy Iyke (talk) 06:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No point in this discussion here, it belongs on the article talk page. Doug Weller  talk 08:45, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022
Your recent editing history at Is Genesis History?‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. McSly (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)