User talk:Jaredhicks27

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Jaredhicks27, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Jaredhicks27, good luck, and have fun. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dogsbite.org. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The simple fact that an unsourced statement is allowed to remain on Wikipedia is the disruptive edit (there is record of what I did, which was simply delete an unsourced sentence). No matter, I marked it citation needed. It shouldn't be too hard to find a biased article backing that statement up, but the author of that sentence couldn't even be bothered to do that. Jaredhicks27 (talk) 02:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The content is cited in the body of the article. Again, material in the lead doesn't require citations. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:40, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article. Jaredhicks27 (talk) 05:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This [1] makes no sense whatsoever, and gives the impression that you are trolling. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So instead of adding a citation where it's needed *in the body of the text*, you simply accuse me of trolling. Wikipedia isn't (or at least shouldn't be) a place where you say any sort of thing you want without any sort of back up Jaredhicks27 (talk) 09:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the middle of a quote from the following ref you added a ^{[citation needed]}. Do you really not see the problem here? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem is that people keep deleting my edits without making corrections. I see there was a citation posted to the top, so I can't do anything about that. Even if I believe the source is silly, biased, untrustworthy, whatever, there needs to be a source (yes, immediately following) if you're throwing numbers down Jaredhicks27 (talk) 10:14, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're independendent statements from different organizations; as such, they need their own citation (even if it's from the same source) Jaredhicks27 (talk) 10:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]