User talk:Thomas Williston Paicarba

December 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Ghale, 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. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, the new contributions added to Ghale has been supported by the external links supporting this. The original research you state has been clearly stated in the text, i.e anywhere in the passage, it is stated if some parts are a myth or folktale. The Magar page shares these same characteristics, such as certain myths or folktales that aided in their history telling, here it is doing the same, nothing more. The information is being compiled and written after referring to many sources and nothing in it is implied. Everything in the passage is from reliable sources, and is the works that are found in the history pieces of Nepal in itself, so the info stated would be self evident. It is information Nepali historians know. The current edit you have changed provides little info, and it defines ghale as having little history when there is an abundant sum, with resources and research to support. The current one confines Ghale and leaves many to think of it as Gurung due to the little info. Please respond with your thoughts on this matter whenever possible, thanks. -  Ghalley777 (talk) 21:19, 21 December 2020 (UTC)