User talk:Sepitropova

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A belated welcome![edit]

The welcome may be belated, but the cookies are still warm!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Sepitropova! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! — Ixtal ( T / C ) Non nobis solum. 21:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Right-hand rule (January 18)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
KylieTastic (talk) 23:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Sepitropova! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 23:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits[edit]

Hello. I think it's necessary to address your recent edits on Baba Vanga. A source being verifiable doesn't necessarily make it reliable. For context about what a reliable source is, see WP:SOURCEDEF, but read the whole WP:RS guideline thoroughly. Vanga's article mostly relies on scholarly sources and journalistic sources (where necessary). Also why is Vanga's supposed statement about Slava Sevryukova so important? Especially in a section about her work. If you think Vanga and Sevryukova are somehow similar, you can place the link to her article in the "See also" section. I see no proof that any source is reliable. Petar Bakov, for example, is a mathematician and lacks the academic credentials.

Another thing. You cannot link to piracy websites in citations because it violates a book's copyright per WP:COPYVIOEL. If you want readers to verify a source, add the page number and a quotation from the source. StephenMacky1 (talk) 20:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not here to discourage you from making edits and articles. You can freely make them but they still have to be in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The feedback and the reverts are nothing personal. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is based on collaboration and even articles created by you can be edited by others. StephenMacky1 (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the encouragement. I could contribute by editing some articles in Mathematics, Physics, and Astronomy. Since I've been programming using the first IBM machines, I suggest it's not going to be such a challenge for me to learn how to talk by using Edit Source. Sepitropova (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestion, I’ll go ahead and add the link in the "See also" section. Sepitropova (talk) 17:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]