User talk:James Term

June 2022
Hello, I'm Haploidavey. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Caligula, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Please don't add external links to article main text, or unsourced text to examples of the subject's treatment in contemporary or modern fiction. The basic treatment of such material should follow Wikipedia's guidelines to ensure relevance to the article's subject. Please read the linked material I'm about to post below.'' Haploidavey (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi. I am not sure why you consider my link unreliable. The 4 books have all been published. Here is a link to a site that saw my book and wrote some commentary about it. I had no input.
 * https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/article/caligulas-kitchen-historical-comedy/
 * Would this be a verifiable and reliable source?
 * Also here is a newspaper article about the book. I did not pay for it. The writer contacted me.
 * https://thesunpapers.com/2019/10/31/local-writer-author-makes-novel-debut/
 * Is this reliable?
 * James Terminiello James Term (talk) 00:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi James. You're welcome take the issue to the WP:Reliable sources noticeboard but my answer is "no" for each case you've given. Wikipedia standards for what and who constitutes a reliable source are quite high; publishers, authors, critics and reviewers should have a good reputation in their particular publishing speciality or academic field. Some newspapers are considered reliable sources, others are not, but most are untested. The default position is that the onus of proof (for verifibility of what they've written, and the reliability of their source) rests with the editor who submits their text to Wikipedia. As soon as a Wikipedia editor hits "save", they've published. That doesn't make them reliable sources, and just having an inline citation to a publication doesn't prove its relevance or its significance. The last really is crucial. Books or articles can be linked externally if they offer or expand on information that would be included in a WP:Featured article.
 * Imperium Romanum is (rather like Wikipedia), staffed and authored by enthusiasts and amateurs, not professionals, and its self-review standards are what you'd expect from a site that pretty much anyone can join. The Imperium Romanum link merely establishes that the work exists, and that you wrote it. It's actually an advertisement. The mere existence of a book is not a criterion for inclusion in a Wikipedia article.
 * The Sun link goes to an article by a local journalist, Stephen Finn, in what seems to be a local paper, publishing a very positive journalistic opinion-piece about you and your work. That doesn't amount to confirmation of the work's significance to the subject (Caligula). In general, journalists who don't specialise in the subject matter they're writing about can't be described as reliable, whether they're working from interviews, publisher's press-releases or, much more rarely than any of these, an independent reading. Authors can't offer an independent opinion of their own work.
 * I hope things go well for you. I know from experience how frustrating it is to have work turned away by a publisher. But there are so many ways to publish and advertise; there's not much to be lost by not having an article in Wikipedia. Haploidavey (talk) 06:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

see discussion on so-called cultural references:

"The consensus is very clear that a secondary source is required in almost all cases. A tertiary source is even better, if available. In the rare case that a primary source is judged to be sufficient, it should be properly cited. The source(s) cited should not only establish the verifiability of the pop culture reference, but also its significance.--Aervanath (talk) 09:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)"

See also WP:Trivia and WP:External links

I see that you created a wikipedia article and linked your chnges at Caligula to it. You should not do that!! Please read up on Wikipedia editing rules and policies before you attempt any more editing of articles. Again, see below.

Thanks for reading this. Haploidavey (talk) 15:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Haploidavey. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Caligula have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Haploidavey (talk) 04:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hi James Term! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Haploidavey (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)