User talk:MattressSmith

Hello, MattressSmith, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
Check out some of these pages:
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Introduction to Wikipedia
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 12:11, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't I edit some particular pages?

Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.

Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?

Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.

How do I create an article?

See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.

How do I create citations?

Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:

==References==
{{Reflist}}

What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?

A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

ARBPIA

Hello. Please know that at the moment you are not yet allowed to edit articles which are related to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, until you reach 500 edits. For more information please read Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles. Eliezer1987 (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I thought "The Case for Israel" was only marginally related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? Besides, if my changes aren't incorrect, why are they being reversed? ~~ MattressSmith (talk) 11:53, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read the instructions carefully. I also suggest you start editing on topics that are not off limits. Continuing to edit against the rules could lead to your being blocked. Eliezer1987 (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I edit as I go along, but I'll be mindful, thanks. MattressSmith (talk) 11:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Francesca Stavrakopoulou

It's remarkable how badly conceived Peterson's "wrestle with god" book was because now theologians are seeing that he's as pants-on-head incompetent with theology as people in philosophy and psychoanalysis have always said he was with philosophy and psychoanalysis. And while a lot of people in philosophy are leftists theology is generally a rather conservative field of academia and so now Peterson is getting a lot of shots fired by more educated people on the right rather than just from the "postmodern neo-marxists". You love to see it. Good edit. Simonm223 (talk) 12:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I just thought it was a point worth added because she is a renowned scholar and her bluntness is damning. But I do agree that he seems to know nothing. MattressSmith (talk) 22:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: God: An Anatomy has been accepted

God: An Anatomy, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 22% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

asilvering (talk) 05:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee has been accepted

The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 22% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

asilvering (talk) 03:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee: Native America from 1890 to the Present has been accepted

The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee: Native America from 1890 to the Present, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Redirect-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Taabii (talk) 09:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks. I'm trying to make it clear that the quote I'm including is valid, has merit, and is made in good faith. MattressSmith (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're already engaged in the talk page discussion, which is great. Be cautious about "bludgeoning", and hold the reverts until there's consensus. You technically violated the 1RR in place at that article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I got annoyed with the shifting goal posts. Now the argument is that a YouTube podcast is self-publication. MattressSmith (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bludgeon

Per wp:bludgeon "In Wikipedia terms, bludgeoning is where someone attempts to force their point of view through a very high number of comments, such as contradicting every viewpoint that is different from their own." that is (litterlay) what you have done, replied to every post that is against you. "Typically, this means making the same argument over and over and to different people in the same discussion or across related discussions. ", again, this is what yu are doing, none of your relies add anything to what you have already said, they just repeat it. Slatersteven (talk) 13:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was making different points.

Do you really think that having a corpse on the page adds value to it? MattressSmith (talk) 13:23, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant, you have made your point, it is time to let others have th90er say, without your commentary on it. Slatersteven (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice. MattressSmith (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]