User talk:StarMountain

Welcome!
Hello, StarMountain, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Donald Trump. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Iady391 &#124; Talk to me here 21:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alerts for articles and content relating to post-1932 American politics and for biographies of living or recently diseased people
Doug Weller talk 11:31, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

March 2019
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Paul Manafort. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 13:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Jexodus. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Doug Weller talk 13:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Acts 20, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Acts_20 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Acts_20?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Please stop changing era styles
You need to follow the guideline at WP:ERA, Göbekli Tepe has been a BCE article for years. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

June 2019
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:


 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting. Thanks! Doug Weller talk 18:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

== October

A summary of site policies and guidelines you may find useful

 * Please sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes ( ~, found next to the 1 key), and please do not alter other's comments.
 * "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is.
 * We do not publish original thought nor original research. We merely summarize reliable sources without elaboration or interpretation.
 * Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards.  User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided.  Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
 * Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources.  This usually means that secular academia is given prominence over any individual sect's doctrines, though those doctrines may be discussed in an appropriate section that clearly labels those beliefs for what they are.

Reformulated:


 * "Truth" is not the only criteria for inclusion, verifiability is also required.
 * Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, use, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
 * We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
 * A subject is considered notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
 * Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards.  User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided.  Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
 * Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources.  Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for.  In the case of science, this evidence must ultimately start with physical evidence.  In the case of religion, this means only reporting what has been written and not taking any stance on doctrine.
 * Material must be proportionate to what is found in the source cited. If a source makes a small claim and presents two larger counter claims, the material it supports should present one claim and two counter claims instead of presenting the one claim as extremely large while excluding or downplaying the counter claims.
 * We do not give equal validity to topics which reject and are rejected by mainstream academia. For example, our article on Earth does not pretend it is flat, hollow, and/or the center of the universe.

Also, not a policy or guideline, but something important to understand the above policies and guidelines: Wikipedia operates off of objective information, which is information that multiple persons can examine and agree upon. It does not include subjective information, which only an individual can know from an "inner" or personal experience. Most religious beliefs fall under subjective information. Wikipedia may document objective statements about notable subjective claims (i.e. "Christians believe Jesus is divine"), but it does not pretend that subjective statements are objective, and will expose false statements masquerading as subjective beliefs (cf. Indigo children).

You may also want to read User:Ian.thomson/ChristianityAndNPOV. We at Wikipedia are highbrow (snobby), heavily biased for the academia.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. All we do here is cite, summarize, and paraphrase professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, without addition, nor commentary. We're not a directory, nor a forum, nor a place for you to "spread the word".

If you are here to promote pseudoscience, extremism, fundamentalism or conspiracy theories, we're not interested in what you have to say. Tgeorgescu (talk) 07 October 2019 15:38:14 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice for post-1932 American politics and living or recently deceased people
Doug Weller talk 17:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Chronology of Jesus. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Chronology of Jesus. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — ALittle Que nhi  ( talk to me ) 03:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

February 2020
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for A long history of warnings on your talk page without ever a response from you or it seems change in your behaviour. Only one use of an article talk page. Your edit today appears to contradict the sources. If you respond and can show on your talk page that it does not, and agree to respond to editors more, other Admins are free to unblock if they wish. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Doug Weller talk 14:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)