User talk:Lou Pai94

Welcome!
Hi Lou Pai94! 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! I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Hello, I'm SSSB. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 2021 Formula One World Championship, 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 the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SSSB (talk) 13:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

February 2022
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Hope not Hate. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Last time I checked Wikipedia was FULL of viewpoints of people who contribute. Hence why universities will not allow students to reference it as fact. Lou Pai94 (talk) 13:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Your first statement is false. We would not want universities to use Wikipedia as a source because Wikipedia is crowd-sourced so there is no way our articles can always be reliable. When universities teach about Wikipedia they normally say it can be a very good way to find reliable sources on a topic. Doug Weller  talk 11:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

June 2022
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at GB News, you may be blocked from editing. Doug Weller talk 11:05, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * @Doug Weller just like you removed my edit without an adequate explanation. The double standards shown by the Wikipedia editors pretty much shows why Wikipedia is not trusted as a factual source. To be honest I've seen more accuracy and impartiality from The Onion. Lou Pai94 (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion. My edit summary was clear and told you what you could do if you disagreed with the content you removed." It isn't? Then provide another source contradicting it, I see no reason to remove it". If you can't do that, well... And you clearly haven't read my comment above. Wikipedia never claims to be a reliable source, but its use is recommended as a way of finding reliable sources.  Doug Weller  talk 12:27, 16 June 2022 (UTC)