User talk:Amigao

Removing unsourced information

Please refrain from outright deleting unsourced or unrealiably sourced text that otherwise contributes to the quality of an article without discussion. Instead you could find a source to cite or use a template such as . In addition, please engage with the cited sources before taking action, as text that might seem unsourced at first glance may be confirmed by a citation further down in the section. Thank you. Khaverte (talk) 14:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that WP:RS is hard WP:POLICY on Wikipedia. One is always free to restore unsourced text with a WP:RS. - Amigao (talk) 15:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I am aware of this. However, I am voicing this request because (a) requesting citations, rather than deleting text, makes the work of other Wikipedians easier, (b) immediate deletion may result in actually sourced text being deleted (as described in the initial message, and as has been the case in the History of opium in China article), and (c) text deletion may result in otherwise valuable and factual information being omitted despite a reliable source being available (but uncited), as not all contributors check the edit history of every page for instances of unsourced text removal that can be restored. See also WP:NOCITE. Khaverte (talk) 15:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

How would a reader even know that a statement is factual if there is no WP:RS there to back it up? That puts an undue burden on the reader to research unsourced text if they wish to confirm its veracity, which is an unrealistic expectation in most cases. How would they know that it is not WP:OR? Also, please see WP:PROVEIT. - Amigao (talk) 15:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

My point regarding (c) does not relate to the reader, but rather to future editors and article quality. Unsourced text deletion lowers the likelihood of WP:BESTSOURCES being added to the article when compared to the use of a {{Citation needed}} template, as it effectively hides the need for additional citations in the edit history. A {{Citation needed}} eliminates the burden on the reader you mention while also avoiding the issues of (a) and (b). Once again, please see WP:NOCITE. To illustrate my position: my work on History of opium in China would have been easier if you had used {{Citation needed}} instead, and if I had not been invested enough to monitor the article's history after my initial edits, it would be unlikely that an outside editor would have noticed the multiple instances of removal and provided the needed sources. Khaverte (talk) 16:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

You can also consider using a sandbox to write drafts if you do not yet have the sources to support the text. It is hard for editors to know when someone makes an edit and intends to add the source later and when they do not. Superb Owl (talk) 17:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

You seem to have misunderstood the issue. That is not at all the case that is being discussed here. Every one of my edits has been accompanied with citations. Khaverte (talk) 17:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

A tag for 'citations needed' is a temporary fix but one that seldom leads to the tagged text getting a WP:RS in practice. There are some good past discussions about this very issue in the talk archives of WP:V and WP:RS that I recommend. - Amigao (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Deletion, on the other hand, almost never (this case being an exceedingly rare exception) leads to the text getting a WP:RS, by virtue of the would-have-been-tagged text simply no longer existing in the article body. Why not choose seldom making the article better over almost never doing so?

You have still not addressed (a) or (b).

Could you please link to those discussions? There are 81 archive pages on WP:V alone and I do not find it reasonable to expect a user to read through all of them in search of a discussion concerning a specific topic. Khaverte (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

It's obvious he has a bias and interest in being Pro-American, Pro-Israel and Pro-Disruption in his edits. This account might be under the control of a government mass psyops program, he also removed my edit regarding Global Times and changed it back to being objective. We should report this account. Preaching of "state actors" in his user page while doing actions of similar caliber is crazy. Invictalock (talk) 10:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Also, thank you for adding WP:BESTSOURCES to History of opium in China. This is a good instance of how this process leads to an all-around stronger article. - Amigao (talk) 16:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

TNT and Synth

I don't call for TNT lightly - the references in that article are so entangled and use so much WP:SYNTH that blowing up and starting over really does seem like the correct call. Please review my detailed notes here - I put them at article talk because, regardless of whether my AfD succeeds, these serious deficiencies in citation need to be addressed. Simonm223 (talk) 16:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

It's quite obvious he has a bias and interest in being Pro-American, Pro-Israel and Pro-Foreign Interest in his edits. This account might be under the control of a government psyops effort, he also removed my edit regarding Global Times and changed it back to being heavily biased after I corrected his wording. We should seriously consider reporting this account. Preaching of "state actors" in his user page while engaging in the same behaviour is crazy. Invictalock (talk) 14:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Actually, while we don't always agree, I have a fair bit of respect for Amigao, who I think comports themselves appropriately on WP far better than average, which is why I came here and explained to them why I was attempting something unusual. Please don't try to involve me in your personal conflict. Simonm223 (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

PressTV as source of Iranian designation

I saw you removed my edit on Iran considering the HTS as terror org due to the PressTV source. How would this not fall under the exception. It's a state-media source being used to determine how the Iranian state considers the HTS (a terror group or otherwise). It's not being used as a source for facts on an event. ReiPeixe (talk) 00:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

It's obvious he has a bias and interest in being Pro-American, Pro-Israel and Pro-Disruption in his edits. This account might be under the control of a government mass psyops program, he also removed my edit regarding Global Times and changed it back to Objectivism. We should report this account. Preaching of "state actors" in his user page while doing actions of similar caliber is crazy. Invictalock (talk) 10:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

GA for Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications

Thought I should let you know that I plan to nominate the article Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act for GA. I am the third highest editor behind you and another so it felt right to let you know. If you had any interested in jumping in as a co-nom that would be wonderful but otherwise thank you for the work you've already put into the page. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Trying to kick XLinkBot

Are your two requests at User talk:XLinkBot/RevertList from a few months ago still worth pursuing? DMacks (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, DMacks. Yes, they are. Thanks. - Amigao (talk) 18:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Yang Youlin - Questionable Edits

Hello. I come inquiring about the article on Mr. Yang Youlin and your edits in relation to his article. I would like to state that your deletion of the Legacy section seems a bit biased. The Legacy section was added to provide the readers with information as to how he is memoralized in China, not exactly to propogate Communist ideals. The deletion of the section seems somewhat biased, considering that it did contain some quotes which did harbor communist sentiment. The information is meant to convey how he is memoralized, not to tell the reader how to feel about their death.

If there is any justifiable defense against your actions, I'd like to hear it. PrivateRyan44 (talk) 01:25, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The text requires WP:RS to back it up, which it did not have. Nothing wrong with a 'Legacy' section per se, but it must be backed up with WP:RS. - Amigao (talk) 01:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources, yes I understand that. Working on that right now; if you looked at the previous version I added, I did put a few more sources. If you wish, you can search through the Hubei Provincial Archives yourself for more info. PrivateRyan44 (talk) 01:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:CS is also a great resource for citing. - Amigao (talk) 01:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I really don't know what to make out of it

See this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Schechter&oldid=1264739643 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 07:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Definitely not a WP:RS. - Amigao (talk) 16:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Greetings of the season

~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~

Hello Amigao: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas3}} to send this message.

--Dustfreeworld (talk) 11:58, 24 December 2024 (UTC)