User talk:Dematt/ChiroPractice

Welcome fellow editors!

This page is for editors of the chiropractic page. We are attempting to merge the introduction with the lead while integrating other information elsewhere throughout the article. Anyone is welcome to make any changes they would like. This is only practice! Keep it friendly so we can be freely creative and try anything. There is nothing that says any of these changes will take place;)

Most important - Have FUN! --Dematt 23:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where to start

I have copied the entire chiro article to this user page. As we find new places for the intro information, we can ~~strike~~ it out until we're finished and then we'll see what we have left. Feel free to chime in anywhere. --Dematt 23:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fear that we'll run into problems dealing with the whole article here. (The original will get changed in the meantime, so we can expect to revise it here and move it as a replacement in toto.) How about limiting it to the Lead and Introduction here? We can strike out and move to a holding area in the bottom. Then we can strike them out as we integrate them into the article itself, doing so with a dif. reference, showing who, when, and where it went. We just need the lead and intro, without any other stuff. -- Fyslee 00:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - I'll leave the whole article here so we can have it to reference and maybe move to for now. Maybe we can bold any moves so that we remember to change the real article later. I've broken the lead and intro away from the intro and the rest of the article. Hopefully it won't get too confusing. Right now I think we should jus move blocks of info and then reword to make it flow. --Dematt 00:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, this will be fun. Good point Fyslee, we should be careful, but the lead and intro haven't been getting changed much so we should be "mostly" ok. :) We should also ensure it follows the order of the article too.--Hughgr 00:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - I moved some things to different sections, but need to stop for your input. I can already see some weak spots that we need to mention in the lead once we're done moving this stuff around. You guys take a couple shots at it and see what you think. --Dematt 00:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm scared. I moved some things but didn't like it. I'll have to check back on this one tomorrow. :)--Hughgr 02:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're unsure or scared, just revert it. If you reevaluate what you did and think it might have been good anyway, you can always find it in the history. Fortunately this isn't the original article, so blunders don't have real consequences. We just need to make sure that we don't change any meanings one way or the other while doing this. (We're trying to improve the format, not the balance of POV. That can be done later.) It can happen inadvertently, but since we trust each other's motives, we should be able to work things out. The strength of this kind of collaboration is that we see things with different eyes and come from different POV, so we can correct each other's blind spots. I know I have them, and hope you'll point them out if I goof up. -- Fyslee 11:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay- your turns. I tried to organize a little more. The "limbo" stuff almost looks like it can have seperate sections of its own, otherwise we need to integrate them into other sections. Hughgr - you always have good suggestions - do your thing! --Dematt 13:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got it all placed - Need input

Okay - I got it all placed according to sections within the lead with some still in limbo. I haven't changed anything from the sentences or paragraph formating. We can do that at the end. Next step is to decide if we want to integrate the other info into the lead, the article, or trash it. Need some input on this. --Dematt 20:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I bow in awe at your feet, oh guru Dematt! You have done a great job. It's longer than the original lead, but rather too long than too short. Can it be tightened up without losing anything of importance? (Keep the small section headings in there for now. They are a great help.) If it gets tightened up, maybe the extraneous (for the lead) parts can then be incorporated in the appropriate sections in the article. -- Fyslee 21:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is exciting. I will look at it next week. Nice work! Levine2112 02:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen what you've done up to this point. It looks so good I'd suggest that you now write about it at the chiropractic talk page, and see if everyone is satisfied enough to allow a block substitution - your new synthesis for the old lead and intoduction. We can then begin further fine tuning in the actual article.

What'll then be left to be done is with the tidbits. They can be dealt with like any other edit, and then ~~crossed out~~ here when they are taken care of. -- Fyslee 07:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, moved it over to chiro talk. Let's see what happens. --Dematt 17:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]