Wikipedia talk:Co-op/usedtobecool

Welcome to the Co-op! We have a mentor for you.

Hello, Usedtobecool! Thank you for your interest in the Co-op. You've been matched with Anne Delong, who has listed "writing" in their mentorship profile. Your mentor will be contacting you soon to get things started. HostBot (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, usedtobecool. I notice that you have recently joined Wikipedia. It's great to have new editors on the team! It's also very good that you've figured out how to add references.

I see that you have been expanding the Kusmanda Sarowar Triveni Dham article. If you are familiar with this subject, there is one thing that you could do that would make the article more encyclopedic and more accurate. In one paragraph it says "it is believed"; this is rather vague, and also misleading, because it implies that everyone in the world believes this, when for sure there are many who are unfamiliar with this temple. Can you reword this to include the name of the group or groups who hold this belief?

I will be glad to answer any questions you have about writing an encyclopedia article, which is somewhat different from other types of Internet writing.—Anne Delong (talk) 23:31, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Anne Delong, Namaste! Thank you for your kind words. Excited to be here!

I very much appreciate you taking time to help me out. I was curious to find which of the things around me were deemed notable by wikipedia when I came across this Kusmanda Sarowar Triveni Dham article. I might make it my subject for learning all things wikipedian. Yes, I expanded the article a bit. But, there's still a lot to do. For example Kusmanda is a misspelling to begin with. I replaced it with the correct "Kushmanda" in the article but couldn't figure out how to do that with the title, both displayed and page link. I also want to create URL paths or redirects for a lot of alternative spellings of each word in the title. Can you help me with that? Regarding your suggestion, I replaced "it is believed" with "Hindus believe" (I find it impossible to be more specific when it comes to Hinduism as you can see from the Introduction of the religion that it is unlike any other in that it defies attempts to define and categorise beliefs and adherents) and restructured the following sentence into what I believe will form a more coherent narrative.

I suppose, I won't have to unlearn much, having not done much of any type of writing- internet or otherwise :) Here's to hoping I have triggered a notification on your account. Cheers!-Usedtobecool (talk) 18:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Usedtobecool: I see that you figured out how to sign your posts!

About your spelling change: It seems as though Kusmanda Sarowar Triveni Dham isn't being discussed much at all in English. Outside of pages which are based on Wikipedia (which I eliminated by adding -Wikipedia in my Google search) there were ten web pages which mention it without the h and none at all with an h. Based on that you shouldn't change the spelling. Wikipedia always goes with the most commonly used spelling, unless there's a consensus among interested editors that another spelling is more appropriate. If the title is to be changed, it's done with the "Move" function, usually found on the menu bar under the little triangle. However, that's usually done after a discussion on the talk page to make sure other agree with the change..

I saw that the article had several citations to the same reference, so I have combined them for you. There's a handy utility that does that; you can find it by typing "reFill" into the search engine.

It will likely seem strange at first, but when writing in a Wikipedia article, editors shouldn't add first hand information, but instead should write in plain, and clear language facts that they read in published sources not connected with the subject, such as newspapers, magazines or books (paper or online). This is how a distinction is made between what may be important to a small group of individuals and what is important to the world in general. If there aren't any such write-ups to be found, then Wikipedia shouldn't have an article about that subject. The fact that you are talking about alternative spellings leads me to believe that perhaps there are references in another language about this topic. If so, they can be cited with a translation of the title and name of the publication. If not it is hard to make a case that this temple is widely known. Before putting work into the alternative spellings, I recommend that you first try to find some sources (not written by people connected with the temple). Otherwise you may log in one day and find that the article has been deleted.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Editing Article: Baburam Bhattarai

Anne, Baburam Bhattarai is a biography of a living ex-primeminister of Nepal. So, I suppose it is of high importance in Nepal Portal. Still, somehow, I feel weird reading it. It isn't the same as reading, say, Tony Blair article. I want to do a major rewriting taking George W. Bush and Tony Blair articles as examples. What do you think? Am I allowed to do this (with important articles)? Will someone get angry?

1. I changed the caption of the first non-infobox picture from "Baburam Bhattarai performing speech during the program organized by Nepalese Peoples Progressive Forum in Sydney 2013" to "Baburam Bhattarai addressing a program organized by Nepalese People's Progressive Forum in Sydney in 2013".

2.The second sentence:

As a way out of the political deadlock since the dissolution of the first Nepalese Constituent Assembly in May 2012, he was then replaced by Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi to head an interim government that should hold elections by 21 June 2013.

is what specially troubles me. For one thing, it seems as though the introduction to one person is beginning with a sentence that emphasizes another person more. For another, I do not like the sentence structure. How would you rewrite this sentence? - Usedtobecool (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

1. Yes, Usedtobecool, "addressing" is better that "performing" when you are talking about a speech.

2. The sentence is awkwardly written and difficult to understand. The BBC explains it better. How about something like "Because of a political deadlock, the Constituent Assembly which he was leading dissolved in May 2012. Although his term was intended to run until June 2013, he stepped down in March so that a coalition government led by Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi could oversee the upcoming elections." This gives the same information, but tells what he did instead of what was done to him.

You are right to suspect that there will be problems with other editors if you totally rewrite an important article without consulting others. Here is the usual process: First, read the talk page to see what has already been discussed. Don't change parts that people have already agreed about unless the information is out of date or something like that. Then take one paragraph or small section and change it to be more clear, accurate, better sourced, or whatever. Wait to see if anyone responds by reverting your changes, making new changes, or commenting on the talk page. If so, discuss before going further and try to get an agreement. If you think that the changes may be controversial, consider leaving a notification at WT:Wikiproject Nepal. If all is well go on to further changes.—Anne Delong (talk) 22:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)