User talk:AmericanTruth

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Fire Island Lighthouse, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

• Copying text from other sources
• Policy on copyright
• Frequently asked questions on Wikipedia's copyright policy
• Policy and guideline on non-free content

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 08:36, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Great South Bay has been reverted.
Your edit here to Great South Bay was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline (see also this list of frequently-discussed sources). The reference(s) you added or changed (https://cryptidz.fandom.com/wiki/Giant_Great_South_Bay_Horseshoe_Crab#Explanations) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:34, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Great South Bay Giant Horseshoe Crab is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great South Bay Giant Horseshoe Crab until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

— hike395 (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Please do not create, maintain or restore hoaxes on Wikipedia. If you are interested to know how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements already in Wikipedia – and, if possible, correct them. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Continued disruption will be met with sanctions, which could include a block from editing. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 03:38, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

This account appears to be almost entirely devoted to using Wikipedia to spread a meme that originated in a single local newspaper article this year. If an article can't be sustained, then an April Fools joke doesn't belong in half a dozen articles on major topics. Acroterion (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

That is an untrue allegation. I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing and its rules, but I am acting in good faith to learn and improve articles on various topics within my knowledge base. I always make sure to get good sourcing for any information added including for topics like cryptozoology, supposed hauntings, and folklore where this can be inherently difficult. I strive to make up for this difficulty by using legitimate local sourcing for such topics. As for the Great South Bay Horseshoe Crab specifically it is a relatively new cryptid story and not as established as older cryptids and if that makes it ineligible for certain articles so be it. But I would argue the recent spark it has made online warrants its inclusion though its April Fools origins (as well as its spread beyond those origins) should be noted. AmericanTruth (talk) 03:57, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

"Recent" isn't something that gets very far on Wikipedia. You've done other good work on Wikipedia, but the horseshoe crab thing isn't anywhere near the notability guidelines on WP. Please stop trying to shoehorn it into every place you can think of. It was a joke, a recent one, that was purely local. If it turns out like the Mothman or the Montauk Monster in a few years, and has suitable enduring sourcing, then it might be worth measured inclusion. Acroterion (talk) 04:01, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of cryptids, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. See WP:USERG. Donald Albury 15:31, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

How is an article from a local NPR affiliate not a reliable source? AmericanTruth (talk) 15:36, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

You are right, I misclicked and went to the List of Lost Tapes episodes. Note, though, that the NPR report you want to cite is skeptical about the authenticity of the Oklahoma octopus, noting various discrepancies in the stories about it, and states that the legend only became popular after it was featured in an episode of the Lost Tapes series, which the NPR article calls a pseudo-documentary. The Oklahoma octopus is an urban legend, not a cryptid. Donald Albury 18:20, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Is it not true that most if not all cryptids are urban legends? If mothman not an urban legend? Dubious media whether it be shows like "Lost Tapes" or old newspaper articles are the origin point of many if not most cryptids. We're talking about a pseudoscience here afterall. AmericanTruth (talk) 18:30, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Regarding your edits at List of urban legends, "minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Read Help:Minor edit for more information. Sundayclose (talk) 20:39, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of urban legends, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2026 (UTC)