Misplaced Pages

User talk:Gounc123: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:25, 17 March 2013 editDisc Wheel (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,965 edits →UNC Recruits 2013: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 12:55, 18 March 2013 edit undoGounc123 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,738 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 23: Line 23:


LAST: if an editor disagrees with my posts, always put in an explanation of why you changed it. I have had multiple instances of an editor taking away one of my postings and then changing it in minor details and then claiming that post as their own. LAST: if an editor disagrees with my posts, always put in an explanation of why you changed it. I have had multiple instances of an editor taking away one of my postings and then changing it in minor details and then claiming that post as their own.

== UNC Recruits 2013 ==

Hey,

I like that you are editing North Carolina pages. But please do not re-add that information I removed under the recruits for 2013 banner. As a heads up and a goal for you to work toward is how a football season page should look. ] <small>(] + ])</small> 13:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:55, 18 March 2013

Tatesullivan, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi Tatesullivan! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the TeahouseThis message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Feedback to people that edit my postings

Using same/similar formatting as before: If I think a previously used table is useless, I will change it. If an editor comes back to me with valid feedback on why appropriate to keep the original formatting, I will understand. When I don't understand an edit is when they simply revert to the old formatting/post without feedback.

My interpretation of "encyclopedic": I don't offer my interpretation of facts, but I do take the mosaic of facts and use that mosaic to make unbiased factual observations. Sometimes editors will say "original research", but for example if a company has a decline in operating margins, the calculation of those operating margins is not "original research."

Plot summaries for tvs/movies concise an to the point: Some summaries on wikipedia have tons of detail and some don't. If a person is willing to put in more details about a summary, then an editor should not just delete those extra details and say "superfluous", in my opinion. What is superfluous to a random editor may be a useful point of edification for another user.

Opinions versus facts: Of course a page shouldn't have an opinion, but if the writers of a show/movie use plot devices to move a story forward and there is enough supporting detail to explain the motivations of characters, then I think that should be in there.

LAST: if an editor disagrees with my posts, always put in an explanation of why you changed it. I have had multiple instances of an editor taking away one of my postings and then changing it in minor details and then claiming that post as their own.