User talk:109.78.197.87

Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without your IP address being visible to the public).

Create an account

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

• Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, just use this link to ask for help; a volunteer will visit you here shortly!

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

If you have any questions at all, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Happy editing! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 12:12, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I have replied to your message at User talk:WeatherWriter#Article comes first, lead comes after. As you are editing anonymously, I do not have any other way to let you know I have replied, besides posting a little note here. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:48, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Your response was flippant, I don't think you are taking this encyclopedia seriously. Even experience editors would benefit from going back to basics and rereading the fundamentals WP:SIMPLE rules of this encyclopedia and also making sure they are familiar with WP:LEAD and WP:PROSE. -- 109.78.197.87 (talk) 19:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I am taking it very seriously. I actually admitted I was wrong in the very first sentence of my response saying, "I did make a simple mistake". Yes, experienced editors can benefit from going back to Wikipedia's rules. I've actually re-read the five fundamental pillars of Wikipedia a few times in the last few years. I do appreciate you finding the error. You are new to editing Wikipedia, so please just know, I am not out to get out. We are both volunteers, working to improve Wikipedia for the better. You have a good knowledgebase of Wikipedia's rules, which is great for a new editor! But you did misinterpret a few of them. We should all be kind to each other, since no one is trying to "win" a debate on Wikipedia. Your initial message to me, while very well intended, it did not really come across as such. One of Wikipedia's guidelines is actually that all editors should always assume the other editors have good faith when editing. I'll try my best to be kind, and if you would let me, I would like to guide you through some of the misinterpretations.

1. In your initial message on my talk page, you correctly explained what WP:LEAD is! As I stated above, I made a wrong, careless error, where I edited the lead message, and not the article message at the same time. This led to the lead stating "400", where the body of the article stated "300". That was a good catch. But, then you stated, "Leaving an article in an inconsistent state is actively disruptive". That is actually a wrong, and actually a potentially dangerous, interpretation of Wikipedia:Vandalism, which is the act of deliberately or actively disrupting Wikipedia. The policy goes on to describe the exact types of "vandalism". Just below that long list of what vandalism is, there is a section called "What is not vandalism" (WP:NOTVANDALISM). The very first item on the list is "accidental misinformation". A simple typographical error, or a forgetful-style error, is not vandalism. Someone who makes that type of an edit/error is not "actively disruptive" to Wikipedia.
2. You correctly interpreted and explained what WP:BURDEN means, which is that the burden of proof for anything being on Wikipedia lies with the editor adding it to the article. That said, technically, the source in the article actually verified what both the lead and the body of the article said. Both the lead and body stated the song had accumulated over 400 million and 300 million streams, respectively. The source actually confirmed both of those statements are true {as the song had 417 million streams, so "over 300 million" and "over 400 million" are both true}. In circumstances like this, part of Wikipedia's editing policy (Wikipedia:Editing policy) is encouraging editors to be bold and actually even fix the mistakes found (WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM). So, while you correctly understand what the burden of proof means, it does not apply to the circumstance.
3. As sort of the last point, I'll mention the always assume good faith (WP:AGF) guideline. Your message right above here mentions you don't believe I am not serious in building an encyclopedia. Obviously, that statement does not assume good faith is occurring.

On my talk page, I actually went ahead and deleted our conversation, as part of Wikipedia's process to deescalate disputes is to simply just drop the conversation. I saw your message here after I had done that. I truly believe you are here to improve Wikipedia. You actually have a better understanding of Wikipedia's policies than I did when I started editing years ago. I do not believe you intended to be negative or sort of "one up" a long-time editor. I use to try to "one up" others 5+ years ago myself, and it got me into a lot of trouble. But, one day, someone took the time to explain it all to me. I hope you take the time to read all of this. I made a mistake, and I owned up to it. I just to not want to see you end up like I did, "shooting myself in the foot" from small mistakes that piled up.

If you have any questions at all, you are welcome to message me on my talk page anytime! I hope you have a wonderful day and keep up the amazing work improving Wikipedia to the best it can be! Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:02, 24 August 2025 (UTC)