User talk:MathMan4

Hello, MathMan4, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Gold Coast, Queensland did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy , and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse , where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! HiLo48 (talk) 03:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

A tag has been placed on Sport Clips requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sport Clips. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator , or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. BangJan1999 23:46, 7 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Hello MathMan4,

I wanted to mention something about the edit you made to the Newsmax article. First, I want to be clear that I am not a conservative, and I'm open about that fact.

My concern is with the wording. Wikipedia generally tries to avoid presenting potentially controversial characterizations as unquestioned facts. The phrase "it is known as" can come across as stating the classification as an objective fact rather than attributing it to reliable sources.

Because political labels can be subjective and sometimes disputed, Wikipedia often uses wording such as "has been described as" or "is described by sources as." Some editors may disagree with labeling Newsmax as conservative, right-wing, or far-right, so attribution helps maintain a neutral point of view while still reflecting what reliable sources say.

That is why I preferred the previous wording, which stated that Newsmax is "variously described as" conservative, right-wing, and far-right rather than saying it is "known as" those things.

As an alternative, we could also use wording such as: "Newsmax has been described as conservative, right-wing, and far-right." This still conveys the information supported by sources while making it clear that the classification comes from those sources rather than from Wikipedia itself.

If I do not hear back from you after a reasonable amount of time, I may revert the edit and restore the previous wording so that the article retains its neutrality . A-verytiredturkey3 (talk) 18:53, 8 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Ah, I see. I will fix that. MathMan4 (talk) 19:18, 8 June 2026 (UTC) [reply ]