User talk:MandolinMagi

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia!

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 01:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

August 2018
Hello, I'm BilCat. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Hawk MM-1, 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! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 01:57, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Hawk MM-1, 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. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 01:58, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

How is IMFDB any less valid than an unsourced page somewhere else on the internet? The MM-1 isn't used by anyone because the MM-1 does not exist. There is no evidence of the MM-1 existing outside a single example used in a few movies. No one has ever seen a MM-1 in use by any military. The listed manufacturer builds RV conversions. ModernFirearms has no supporting evidence and one picture.

There is no reason to believe the MM-1 ever entered production or was adopted by any military ever.--MandolinMagi (talk) 20:48, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Oddly enough, the IMFDB repeats the same information found in ModernFirearms, yet you discount it completely. Further, IMFDB does not state the weapon never entered production, and was only used in movies. Yet this is what you've repeatedly added to the article. Please understand that Wikipedia cannot make such claims unless they are supported by a reliable published source. It's already accepted on Wikipedia that sites like IMDB and IMFDB are not reliable sources, as they have user contributed information. Whether or not ModernFirearms has been deemed a reliable source or not is something I do not know, but there are proper ways to challenge its reliability without adding more unsourced claims to the article. - BilCat (talk) 21:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Because IMFDB copied Wiki which copied ModernFirearms which pulled everything from thin air. The fact remains that only one MM-1 has ever been seen and outside a poorly written unsourced blogpost there is no evidence the MM-1 was ever used by anyone.--MandolinMagi (talk) 01:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Yet you've cited IMFDB as a source for denouncing ModernFirearms, which IMDFB doesn't do. Again, I'm not arguing that ModernFirearms is reliable, but there is a correct way to handle that, and that is not by adding more unsourced claims. - BilCat (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The line about Hawk Engineering should at least be deleted, as they make RVs and are not a weapons manufacturer. --MandolinMagi (talk) 01:15, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * So it's completely impossible that the name was used by a different company? Or that the current company once produced the MM-1? - BilCat (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Here's another question: Is the weapon called the Hawk MM-1 in the Terminator movie? (I own the movie, but haven't watched it in years.) If not, how do you know that's what the weapon is? Maybe it's another model, or a Hollywood prop with no name. Either way, without a reliable published source, that information shouldn't be in the article either, aside from the fact that it doesn't meet the requirements for a pop culture mention per WP:MILPOP. - BilCat (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The only known Hawk Engineering Company is not the maker. Hawk industries, however, might be. The supposed maker, Rogark, has patents with them. Also, IMFDB has an actual movie armorer who does a lot. And given the movie MM-1 is literally the only time it has ever been seen, I'm willing to call it an MM-1. How does ModernFirearms count as reliable anyways?--MandolinMagi (talk) 14:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


 * I've already answered you. I'm not going to repeat myself again. - BilCat (talk) 19:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Hawk MM-1 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hawk MM-1 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hawk MM-1 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. - BilCat (talk) 19:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 16:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 15:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey

Hi ,

There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. [mailto:surveys@wikimedia.org Email us] if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely, RMaung (WMF) 20:35, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

June 2021
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at M47 Dragon. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. No matter how frustrated you get, please don't call people "idiots", even if they discussion deserve it. BilCat (talk) 03:43, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)