User talk:Weeezl

December 2018
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Death of Elisa Lam has been reverted. Your edit here to Death of Elisa Lam was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPOMjmO8xRI) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 01:52, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Death of Elisa Lam, 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. Thegooduser  Let's Chat  🍁 02:41, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

More personal response
Per your assertion in this edit summary, you are wrong. It says above every edit window that "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". No, that is not a requirement that it be cited right when you add it. But it is also part of the terms of editing that "uncited content may be challenged and removed at any time". Since I did the most work on expanding the article, and I am proud of how it has turned out, I have kept it on my watchlist and removed many other additions like yours. At the same time others have contributed productively to it.

Had it just been uncited, I might have waited a while, it is true. But when you added "[t]he lyrics also include the line "Black Water" which may be a reference to the 2005 horror film Dark Water (2005 film)" (emphasis added) you were speculating, which is against our editorial policies for article content (it's one thing if a reliable source speculates, but another if we appear to do it). You also referred to a band and album we don't have an article on yet, one which you have submitted for creation. It would probably be a better use of your time to find reliable sources to establish SKYND's notability rather than jump the gun and add links to the appropriate articles.

If one of those reliable sources is, say, an album review, interview or some other article about the band that discusses the possible meaning of "black water" in the lyrics, then we can put that in the article, with the appropriate citations. But only then. If you can find this sort of thing, you should. Daniel Case (talk) 04:14, 12 December 2018 (UTC)