Mantovano

September 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Abomination of desolation, 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. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

The information I put in my edit is not what you call original research. However, I still have to identify which scholars support the conclusions. There are certainly some and I believe they are right. As soon as I have that further information I will let you know. Mantovano (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

The information I put in my edit is not what you call original research. If it is uncited or if it is cited by primary sources, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that's "original research". Refer to WP:NOR to understand what we mean by that. There are certainly some and I believe they are right. - it doesn't matter whether they are right or wrong. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We are not here to push a point of view (see WP:NPOV). Material of the nature in which you have proposed adding cannot be stated as fact. It is opinion, and therefore, it must be attributed to the source. See WP:ATT for what we mean by "attribution". As soon as I have that further information I will let you know. - you do not need to let me know. Don't take this personally, but I really don't care. If it comes up as an edit, other editors who monitor the encyclopedia to ensure its quality will look at it. If it meets the guidelines, it will stay; otherwise it will be reverted or re-edited. Lastly, use encyclopedic (i.e. matter-of-fact) language; do not editorize. Phrases like It is deceptively simple... or Clearly from the words spoken... or It is noteworthy... These are all unnecessary and imply a POV. Simply state facts without editorial copy. See MOS:EDITORIAL - or better yet, read the entire "Words to watch" article in the Manual of Style. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)