User:JackSchmidt: Difference between revisions
JackSchmidt (talk | contribs) might as well have a user page I guess. |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== [[Teresa Bright]] == |
|||
Howdy, |
|||
Howdy, I was cleaning up some of the technical wiki parts of Teresa Bright and noticed that there were some problems with the references. One problem was just technical, and I can fix it for once the bigger problem is fixed. The bigger problem is that most of the text that you referenced back to the website was taken verbatim, and too much of it was taken to count as a review of the website (and that was probably not your purpose anyways). |
|||
I edit content in my subject area (algebra), and perform technical edits on recently changed or created articles. I like peaceful collaboration on content, and unnoticed technical improvements. |
|||
Please keep working on the article, and rewrite the sections taken from the website in your own words. If there are still big chunks there in a few days, they will probably be deleted. Feel free to respond here if you have any questions, and feel free to concentrate on the content of the article, as others can come by and fiddle with {{templates inclusion}} [[wiki linking]] and <ref>end notes</ref>. JackSchmidt (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Wikipedia allows both content providers and technical editors to work together. Content providers lend their invaluable expertise to wikipedia by composing the core of the articles. Technical editors save content providers from worrying about essential tasks such as minor editing and technical wiki markup. |
|||
Jack, can you take a look at the content again and let me know which additional changes you would like to see? [[User:Dondt1|Dondt1]] |
|||
I tend to think content providing should be left up to subject experts, and so only contribute content to algebra articles. However, wikipedia is a huge place and I enjoy helping with technical editing in a variety of contexts. I firmly believe in the utility of categories and the importance of not [[WP:BITE]]ing new editors, so I enjoy doing new pages patrol, especially to categorize new pages and help new content providers understand the wikipedia process. I also believe firmly in the necessity of [[WP:RS]] reliable sources, and so spend time [[WP:V]] verifying articles in my subject area. |
|||
I like to collaborate on articles, so I tend to edit recently edited articles. I firmly believe in consensus, and follow [[WP:1RR]] by discussing changes on talk pages and modifying edits rather than reverting them. I definitely make mistakes in technical editing, and certainly make some suboptimal content edits. When I do this to an article you're working on, just leave me a note on my [[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk page]], but please be nice. |
|||
==User boxes== |
|||
<div> |
|||
{{Babel|en|de-2|es-1|it-1|latex|js|php|xslt}} |
|||
<!-- {{boxboxtop|Writing scripts}}{{user iso15924|Latn|5}}{{user iso15924|Zmth|3}}{{user iso15924|Grek|2}}{{user iso15924|Hebr|2}}{{user iso15924|Cyrl|1}}{{user iso15924|Hang|1}}{{user iso15924|Hans|1}}{{user iso15924|Hrkt|1}}{{user iso15924|Latf|1}}{{user iso15924|Arab|0}}{{user ipa-0}} |
|||
{{boxboxbottom}} --> |
|||
{{boxboxtop|User}}{{user System Administrator}}{{user mathematician}}{{User degree/MMath}}{{user degree/MLIS}}{{user Kentucky}}{{user NPS}}{{user:scepia/bibliophile}}{{user married}} |
|||
{{boxboxbottom}} |
|||
{{boxboxtop|WikiProject}}{{user WP Math}}{{user CVU1-en}}{{user wikipedia/RC Patrol}}{{user wikipedia/NP Patrol}}{{user wikipedia/Stub sorting}}{{user:galaxiaad/typo}}{{user WikiProject User scripts}}{{User Fact and Reference}} |
|||
{{boxboxbottom}} |
|||
{{boxboxtop|Wikipedia}}{{user AGF}}{{user please be nice}}{{user oops}}{{user 1RR}}{{user noads}}{{user please be nice}}{{user AGF}} |
|||
{{boxboxbottom}} |
|||
</div> |
|||
<div style="clear:both;"></div> |
|||
Revision as of 19:40, 30 January 2008
Howdy, I was cleaning up some of the technical wiki parts of Teresa Bright and noticed that there were some problems with the references. One problem was just technical, and I can fix it for once the bigger problem is fixed. The bigger problem is that most of the text that you referenced back to the website was taken verbatim, and too much of it was taken to count as a review of the website (and that was probably not your purpose anyways).
Please keep working on the article, and rewrite the sections taken from the website in your own words. If there are still big chunks there in a few days, they will probably be deleted. Feel free to respond here if you have any questions, and feel free to concentrate on the content of the article, as others can come by and fiddle with Template:Templates inclusion wiki linking and [1]. JackSchmidt (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Jack, can you take a look at the content again and let me know which additional changes you would like to see? Dondt1
- ^ end notes