User talk:Kawaimagik

December 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Mythology in France, 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. Thank you. EditingProperly (talk) 08:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * In that case, could you please ban all the texts from all the articles that are citing ZERO source to back them up? Including, but not limited to, the text claiming that St Anne would previously be, allegedly, a pagan goddess, without ANY source to back that claim. Because THIS is actual "original research". Not what I wrote (as I quoted an actual historian to back my statement)
 * I was indeed quoting an historian ("Maître de conférences d'histoire moderne à l'université de Rennes 2. Ses recherches portent sur l'histoire du catholicisme breton sur la longue durée.") who is stating that this claim is false. I'm sorry if this historian is not "good enough" for you (and I'm curious to know what could be better than an actual historian), but in that case I am wondering if only 0.001% of all content on Wikipedia should be kept, according to the rules you are referring to? And also why you would keep a claim that has nothing to back it up, as it would easily qualify as "fake news" and "history revisionism".
 * If it's not a problem of source, but of formatting, then I beg your pardon, as I was trying to respect the formatting that I did find elsewhere.
 * Thank you kindly. Kawaimagik (talk) 13:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)