User talk:WWWords

Welcome!

Hello, WWWords, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Spotty Divide (talk) 07:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are your accusations of vandalism justified?

Greetings WWWords,

In the article on Tobin tax, in this edit and in this edit you have accused me of vandalism. These are serious charges.

I did not delete your content. I moved it to a more appropriate location, the new article on the DeFazio financial transaction tax.

Before I did so, I started a discussion in Talk:Tobin_tax: Here is that discussion:

(Quote begins here)

If references don't mention the words "Tobin tax" -- Should their content be a priority in this very long article?

If references don't mention the words "Tobin tax" -- Should their content be a priority in this article?

The article is getting too long: See this Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:Article size. An editor, other than myself, has already tagged this article as being "very long."

Therefore we must set priorities as to what to include in this article.

Therefore I propose that among our lower priorities is the content of references which do not even contain the words "Tobin tax."

That content should be placed in more appropriate Wikipedia articles, such as the following: financial transaction tax, currency transaction tax, Spahn tax, and now the new DeFazio financial transaction tax.

Supporting my proposal is this Wikipedia policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability

Boyd Reimer (talk) 20:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(end quote)

Every time I moved content, I made reference to the above discussion in my Edit Summary as you can see in this edit. Therefore if you knew that it was me who moved the content, then you must have also seen in my Edit Summary the references to the above discussion. And yet you did not join that discussion. Instead, you accused me of vandalism. With all due respect, I would like to know why you accused me of vandalism.

Boyd Reimer (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In retrospect I should forewarned you more clearly that I was going to move content. I could have used all of the useful templates found in this Wikipedia policy article: Wikipedia:Splitting. These templates even tell the reader where the content is moved to, etc. But I just learned of these useful templates now.

I apologize. In the future I will use them.

Boyd Reimer (talk) 12:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also apologize if I may have accidentally, and inadvertently violated this Wikipedia policy on attribution: Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia I just learned of this policy just now. In hindsight, I apologize. - Boyd Reimer (talk) 14:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Increasing need to subdivide the Tobin tax article: your input wanted in discussion

There is an increasing need to subdivide the Tobin tax article: your input is wanted in discussion. Wikipedia policy requires a consensus on this discussion.

Please click here to go to the discussion. Thanks. - Boyd Reimer (talk) 16:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]