| Revision as of 19:34, 13 November 2008 editRJHall (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers90,673 edits →My issue with the FAR process: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:09, 19 November 2008 edit undoWerdnabot (talk | contribs)60,702 editsm Automated archival of 1 sections to User talk:SCZenz/Archive 1Next edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| Welcome to my talk page; please leave new messages at the bottom. I'll respond on your talk page, unless you request otherwise. | Welcome to my talk page; please leave new messages at the bottom. I'll respond on your talk page, unless you request otherwise. | ||
| == Perimeter Institute information == | |||
| Hi There. It seems that I may have inadvertantly caused all of this discussion with adding links to Perimeter Outreach website and yes, I am their marketing/sponsorship manager (although marketing in a very small sense - more like communications). You are absolutely correct in stating that I wasn't aware of the policies regarding the linking and it was in no way meant to be self-serving or in this case my organizations-serving. I also didn't see the discussion or received any of the messages in time to stop adding the links back in. | |||
| As a huge fan of wikipedia, I was just skimming through what the site had on Modern Physics topics and got carried away with my enthusiasm about being able to finally contribute to the overall knowledge. I could instead actually contribute to the articles and make changes on behalf of Perimeter's expertise if this is a better use of what I have to offer. Would this be useful. Meanwhile, I'll stop adding any links. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == My issue with the FAR process == | == My issue with the FAR process == | ||
Revision as of 21:09, 19 November 2008
Welcome to my talk page; please leave new messages at the bottom. I'll respond on your talk page, unless you request otherwise.
My issue with the FAR process
Some of my past experiences have made me feel that the FAR process is a bit threatening, and that people who use it are more concerned with improving Misplaced Pages by "demoting" articles than by working on them. Putting something up at FAR feels to me to be a statement of "fix it or else," rather than just, "this probably needs to be fixed," which makes it premature for the first pass at a problem. I know a lot about particle physics, and I can make improvements to certain articles that relatively few other contributors can make, but I have limited time — and the FAR process feels precisely like an imposed time limit to me. But perhaps my impressions are unjustified — maybe I had an unusual experience in the past, or perhaps things have changed since then. -- SCZenz (talk) 18:02, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Okay. On the other hand, posting issues to article talk pages has often proven futile, at least in my experience. The FAR at least seems to get closer scrutiny, and tends to draw in useful edits to correct significant problem. I'm sorry you feel under pressure over this.—RJH (talk) 19:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)