User talk:Zhadi1

September 2016
Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve the site with your work on the Jonathan Maberry article, as we really appreciate your participation. However, some of the edits had to be reverted, for the following reasons:

First, Wikipedia cannot accept uncited material or original research. This includes material lacking cited sources, material obtained through personal knowledge, or which constitutes the an analysis or interpretation by the editor that is not found in cited sources. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here.

Please keep in mind that it is not necessary to cite a source for the mere existence of a work like a book, film, TV show, etc. since such works are their own primary source for their existence, credits and plot. However, when citing a source for an upcoming work that has not yet been released, it should be a journalistic publication, and not merely a vendor like Amazon or Good Reads. Information such as the awards won by the article subject, should always be accompanied by a reliable, secondary source.

Other things to keep in mind:
 * A grainy, out of focus, lo-res pic is not a better choice for the Infobox portrait than a clear, in-focus photo.


 * Terms should not be wikilinked excessively, as explained by WP:OVERLINK. Wikilinking the name of a publisher every time is appears in a Bibliography is excessive. Wikilinking a term once every few sections is sufficient.


 * Names of organizations should not be formatted with external links to their website, since this violates WP:EL and WP:NOTADVERT. The place for external links in an article is the External links section, and only if it falls under the description of acceptable links explained at External links.

Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 17:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  23:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)