User talk:Firefly074

Welcome Firefly074! Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are registered editors!

Hello Firefly074. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Walter Görlitz, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge. Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type  here on your talk page and someone will try to help. To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Mypage/sandbox&action=edit&preload=Template:User_Sandbox/preload create your own personal sandbox] for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put  on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.

Please remember to: The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the OOUI JS signature icon LTR.png button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes  at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
 * Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.

 Sincerely, Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)   [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_G%C3%B6rlitz&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Welcome_to_Wikipedia/user-talk_preload (Leave me a message)]

Español

Deutsch

Français

Italiano

עברית

Русский

日本語

Polski

فارسی

Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Reese Roper, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. ''You're adding interpretation to Roper's writing. Your additions have been reverted twice. Please seek consensus before adding it again.'' Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Original content
I was told that I was posting unverified original research. This is not true as the only posts I have made have been about Reese Roper and his blog. The same blog is referenced in other citations on the same page. Firefly074 (talk) 16:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Reese Roper. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You're interpreting his words. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:25, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

...I didn’t
I posted an archived blog that he wrote in 2016. It’s literally primary source material written by the man who the page is about. Firefly074 (talk) 04:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Clarification
Can someone explain to me why the exact same source that I cited isn’t deemed credible when it comes to his decision to vote for Trump, yet the ibid cited directly above it is OK when it comes to activism within the LGBT community... Firefly074 (talk) 04:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)