User talk:FinMacVivekMoorthy

Attention! August 2025

Hello Sir or Ma'am, I am Criticize, and we Welcome you to Wikipedia. We admire your ability to edit here; but, in one of your Edits to the page called, Black Wednesday, — as in This Edit — it looks like you added Original Research, which is against Wikipedia's rules. Original research relates to information — such as facts, assertions, ideas, and personal views — for which no published reliable sources, exist to prove the reality of the information you just added. It also falls within Combining published sources, in a way to write something that none of them exactly reveal. So, I am kindly asking you to always be ready to Cite a Reliable source for all edits you may do. Please have a quick look at the "Tutorial on citing sources" to learn how we do this. If you have any questions, you can ask for help Here at the "Teahouse" or Here at the "Help Desk". Thanks. Criticize (talk) 13:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr./Ms. Criticize: Thank you for your email. Here is my reply. I was looking for the original article about Black Wednesday, which I have cited from, but could not find it among my books and papers. It may be in the garage, in a file of clippings of articles from the Financial Times written by the late Sir Samuel Brittan but have not searched there as yet.

In the meantime, I contacted the FT London, who were earlier unable to locate the hard copy, and their digital archives do not go that far back. They finally tracked it and sent it to me. The article is titled “Anatomy of the UK Defeat” dated 24 September 1992, and the exact, elegant citation is, “Everywhere in central Europe I heard sterling attacked before the schnapps”.

However, the article was written after Black Wednesday, not before it in May, as I had thought. Therefore it is valid for you to delete the entry, since I had written that he had foreseen the attack on sterling. He might well have foreseen it, but he wrote about it only after it was devalued. Hence we cannot know for sure, and should not give him credit for it.

(In case you were curious about my interest in and knowledge about 16 September 1992, I was at the Foreign Exchange Desk of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York then, and had written a co authored memo about that episode that does have some noteworthy findings. If and when the occasion arises, I may want to add to Wikipedia on that, but not as of now).

Regarding the terminology that you have used in your email, I think what you mean by Original Research is Non Cited Content or Material. The rules of Wikipedia not to include such entries are correct. As far as possible, every sentence, fact, quote, argument should have a cited source. However, it is not always possible to adhere to this criterion, and judgement and discretion is called for in such cases.

My request to you, in your future research and editing, is to change your term Original Research to Cited Content (or Material, whichever word you prefer) and Non Cited Content. The term you have used can be confusing since Wiki’s goal is to cite original research. I could expand on this theme but will leave that for future correspondence, if the need arises.

Once again, using without citing, the expression frequently used by the President of the United States, thank you for your attention to this matter. With regards. FinMacVivekMoorthy (talk) 14:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, FinMacVivekMoorthy, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Galaxybeing (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Paradox of thrift have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Paradox of thrift was changed by FinMacVivekMoorthy (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.922637 on 2025-08-27T06:56:04+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 06:56, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Please read WP:minor edit. In summary, minor means 'has no effect on meaning, not that it is short. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]