User talk:Sascha Düerkop

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Sascha Düerkop, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page.

On a more personal note, I read about you in my local newspaper (Göteborgs-Posten) today! As my contributions here mainly are focused around football I was of course curious to find out more about your project, and I hope it is successful. :) If you want to discuss anything regarding football, there is a WikiProject dedicated to the sport (Wikipedia:WikiProject Football) which contains guidelines, an active talk page and a lot more that might help you out. Also having checked some of your contributions, I want to make you aware of the fact that sourcing material on Wikipedia to your self-published website is likely not compliant with Wikipedia's guidelines for verifiability and reliable sources. It is better if you directly cite the references you used (if they comply with the mentioned guidelines) when you wrote the article for your website. :)

Again, welcome! – Elisson • T • C • 17:14, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Johan,

thank you so much for your warm welcome here. I was on a brief holiday while the GP article appeared, but am now back to editing :)

I am aware of the WikiProject Football page, but struggled to find a style sheet for the "Football In" article, which is the main thing we are working on right now, unfortunately. Yet, it is utterly helpful, of course!

Re linking to my self-published website I see where you are coming from and did wonder if this is fine for Wikipedia. The reason I have decided to go along is that it is in all these cases the only current source for it - apart from non-open-sourced articles from (PPV) newspaper archives. Thus, I concluded it is probably in the readers interest to do it this way (while of course the articles there are well-referenced). Please do let me know if you find anything in particular worth changing on this front :) Sascha Düerkop (talk) 13:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great! :) Regarding sources, it is always better to cite the original newspaper(s) in that case, even if it is behind a paywall or not easily accessible on the web. Much information across Wikipedia is sourced to books and publications that are not open-source, and it is completely fine. It's better to cite those reliable secondary sources rather than citing a tertiary source such as your site, for many different reasons, including the Wikipedia policies on WP:RS, WP:NOR, and WP:V. For example, it is easier for the community at large to evaluate positively the reliability of a known secondary source such as a newspaper or book, than a new and largely unknown self-published website. (You also run into the risk of being accused of undue WP:SELFCITE.) Best wishes! – Elisson • T • C • 06:46, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Football in Zimbabwe, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 22:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]