Talk:Cognitive Warfare

I am getting a message that "Cognitive Warfare" may not meet notability?

I'm not sure how to inquire about this. CW is a separate form of warfare distinguishing itself in military circles as an evolved iteration of psychological and information warfare. Academic and military circles have made this distinction and I presented a clear case for this; yet I still see this at the top of the article. CognitiveOP (talk) 05:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Weasel words??

Hey all!

I looked up the definition of weasel words but the definition seems to be just as ambiguous!

SOS wikipedians!

Thanks again!! CognitiveOP (talk) 07:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

CognitiveOP: Apologies for the tone; I realise these standardised warnings can come across as impersonal, especially for new contributors.

I do hope others stop by and can give a second or third opinion. The fact is, I've made a few attempts at trying to understand this article, and I don't know whether it's my lack of expertise in cognitive science and military matters, or the dense language it's written in, but this article remains inscrutable to me. Therefore I also can't assess whether this is an accurate summary of reliable secondary sources, or contains original research or fringe theories.

To be clear, this is not a judgment of you or your work, but keep in mind that the goal of Wikipedia is to build an encyclopaedia, that is, a tertiary reference, accessible to general readers, that summarises topics that have already seen significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. To that end, we strive to make technical or specialised subjects comprehensible to general readers, while holding fast to our fundamental principles. You may also find the essay Relationships with academic editors illuminates how scholars and Wikipedians may end up at loggerheads despite everyone's best intentions. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 08:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)