User talk:Irath2024

Welcome!
Hello, Irath2024, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Cognitive bias, seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see: If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:
 * Policy on neutral point of view
 * Guideline on spam
 * Guideline on external links
 * Guideline on conflict of interest
 * FAQ for article subjects
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and how to develop articles
 * Help pages
 * Tutorials
 * Article wizard for creating new articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! MartinPoulter (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)


 * If an edit you make gets undone, the thing to do is not make the edit again: that's what we call edit warring and can lead to being blocked. The procedure is to go straight to discussion to build consensus for the change you want to make. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 13:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * What makes citing this book a advertising and not the other books ? There is no link to any commercial website or even any comment, other than adding the book in "Further readings" section with the Wikepedia formating. Sorry, but it is up to the readers here and elsewhere to decide what to read or not. You can add things you think deserve to be mentioned but not remove like this. And why is it allowed for you undo things and not other people? Is this seriously objective and in the spirit of open encyclopedia ? Sorry, but I do not agree.
 * Regards, Irath2024 (talk) 13:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Irath2024 I reviewed your attempted changes and reversals at the article Cognitive bias and subsequent discussion.
 * Many times actual things can be different than we expect, Every platform is different and so Wikipedia is. Me and most others were new comers at this platform and gone through unexpected surprises different than what we expected differently.
 * If I make a mistake even my content may be reverted and that has really happened and still I have continued improving myself same time helping others.
 * My friendly advice is shrug of your apprehensions at this point, if any, WP:DROPTHESTICK there can be many more opportunities to work here even though some constraints do exists, do you know any place and time where constraints are not there? I suggest first spare some time study the platform it's policies and culture that shall help you to take things into stride.
 * If you do not believe users you have come across up til now then you can request help at WP:Teahouse also you can confirm about reference related policies at  WP:RSN.
 * I look forward a constructive intention user like you, studies how the things work, become long term contributor to Wikipedia. Wish you happy editing. &#32;Bookku    (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Also note though most policies are likely to be similar across various language Wikipedia, You shall need to confirm policies independently at every language Wikipedia where necessary, since practically they may have independent policies. So English Wikipedia may have some differences than French Wikipedia. I hope this helps. &#32;Bookku    (talk) 14:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I want to endorse the wise advice of User:Bookku and I hope you listen to it. I just want to address a few points in your reply. 1) Nobody has claimed that the rules apply differently to me than to other people. The prohibition against edit-warring applies to me, you, and everyone else contributing to Wikipedia. It's really important to understand that. 2) You seem to think that because you are a reader of Wikipedia, you have some special role to decide what gets put in articles. Just like any other publisher, Wikipedia has rules about what it publishes, and we all have to follow them. Reading the article doesn't make you special. (You seem to think that I am not also a reader of Wikipedia!?). 3) In the discussion on the Talk page, I've given you a link to explain why a self-published book is not admissible, but other books are. Reading that will help you understand Wikipedia a lot better. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 18:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)