This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi @ Potscamp:! I just received your email, and I wanted to address it here on the Talk page. The email I received was: "Who are you and why do you think you have a right to edit the article for OLD KIA KIMA? I represent Old Kia Kima. I wrote the original article. I am the website administrator for Old Kia Kima."
First off, welcome to Wikipedia! And thank you for writing this article! As you know, Wikipedia is dedicated to collaborative editing, and as stated in WP:OWNERSHIP, "an organization that is the subject of an article does not own the article, and has no right to dictate what the article may say." My edits were not intended to be adverse and were intended to improve the article. For example, the additional categories I added increase the visibility of the article, and the changes to the infobox help promote uniformity with other similar articles. We also don't need to use Redirect template for "OKKPA" since there is no other article currently that the abbreviation could refer to. Do you have issues with any specific edits I made? Let's build consensus here on the Talk page. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 18:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Potscamp ( talk) 21:22, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Deflagro: @ Evrik: First some comments/questions/summary. I will try to address everything brought up on August 18 by Deflagro and Evrik.
At what point does consensus occur? Editor Deflagro invited a third party editor (Evrik) into the discussion. Evrik says my article "looks good". Even Deflagro says I "wrote a good article". The edit by Deflagro changed the intent of the article from being about the current entity (Old Kia Kima which did not exist until after 1996) to a past entity (the old camp Kia Kima which existed prior to 1963).
Other than the new lede, the only new information introduced in the edit by Deflagro is a statement about the property being purchased by OKKPA in 1998. This information is noted in the introductory paragraph and again in the History section. Everything else is taken from my original article but has been rearranged. In the edit by Deflagro a number of items were deleted or changed some of which I will concede in the interest of trying to reach consensus.
The following items were deleted by Deflagro: 1) the redirect from OKKPA, 2) the physical address of the camp, 3) the section about Old Kia Kima Preservation Association, 4) one of the entries listed under See also/External Links, 5) two of the entries listed under References.
I will concede deletion of items 1,2,4 and 5 but not 3. Old Kia Kima Preservation Association is an important and integral part of what Old Kia Kima is today and should be included.
The following items were changed by Deflagro: 1) the "Brief History" section was renamed "History", 2) the "See also" section was renamed "External Links", 3) the word "upriver" was added to the sentence about the camp moving in 1964, 4) the sentence about the Arkansas Register of Historic Places was enhanced to include "for historical significance and local architectural style", 5) the location.
I will concede changes 1,2,3 and 4 but not 5. The location for the camp has historically and traditionally been referred to as being on the South Fork River near Hardy, Arkansas. Even the KKSR Wikipedia article lists the location as Hardy, Arkansas.
I do not understand the proposed addition of "Main article: Kia Kima Scout Reservation" when there are already other appropriate links to the KKSR article.
Regarding the counter proposal by Deflagro for the lede. ("Old Kia Kima is a youth campground near Hardy, Sharp County, Arkansas, that is listed on the Arkansas Register of Historic Places for local historical significance and local architectural style. The campground was previously the site of Kia Kima Scout Reservation, a Boy Scouts of America summer camp, and many of the historic buildings have since been restored in the original architectural style.") I do not consider myself to be an expert writer but I feel I am above average and I see these 2 sentences to be long, wordy and difficult to read. I stand by my lede as written.
I do not understand Deflagro's need to edit the text of my article when it seems he is just trying to rearrange things I have already written.
To Deflagro, I think you are too humble in the way you describe your knowledge of these topics. The extensive Wikipedia edit logs would suggest you have a wide-ranged interest in subjects in the regions around Hardy, Arkansas and West Tennessee.
This experience has shown me that what happens in Wikipedia stays in Wikipedia forever, even some of the silly things and personal information we posted on our user pages when we first joined Wikipedia. Potscamp ( talk) 13:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi @ Potscamp:! I just received your email, and I wanted to address it here on the Talk page. The email I received was: "Who are you and why do you think you have a right to edit the article for OLD KIA KIMA? I represent Old Kia Kima. I wrote the original article. I am the website administrator for Old Kia Kima."
First off, welcome to Wikipedia! And thank you for writing this article! As you know, Wikipedia is dedicated to collaborative editing, and as stated in WP:OWNERSHIP, "an organization that is the subject of an article does not own the article, and has no right to dictate what the article may say." My edits were not intended to be adverse and were intended to improve the article. For example, the additional categories I added increase the visibility of the article, and the changes to the infobox help promote uniformity with other similar articles. We also don't need to use Redirect template for "OKKPA" since there is no other article currently that the abbreviation could refer to. Do you have issues with any specific edits I made? Let's build consensus here on the Talk page. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 18:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Potscamp ( talk) 21:22, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Deflagro: @ Evrik: First some comments/questions/summary. I will try to address everything brought up on August 18 by Deflagro and Evrik.
At what point does consensus occur? Editor Deflagro invited a third party editor (Evrik) into the discussion. Evrik says my article "looks good". Even Deflagro says I "wrote a good article". The edit by Deflagro changed the intent of the article from being about the current entity (Old Kia Kima which did not exist until after 1996) to a past entity (the old camp Kia Kima which existed prior to 1963).
Other than the new lede, the only new information introduced in the edit by Deflagro is a statement about the property being purchased by OKKPA in 1998. This information is noted in the introductory paragraph and again in the History section. Everything else is taken from my original article but has been rearranged. In the edit by Deflagro a number of items were deleted or changed some of which I will concede in the interest of trying to reach consensus.
The following items were deleted by Deflagro: 1) the redirect from OKKPA, 2) the physical address of the camp, 3) the section about Old Kia Kima Preservation Association, 4) one of the entries listed under See also/External Links, 5) two of the entries listed under References.
I will concede deletion of items 1,2,4 and 5 but not 3. Old Kia Kima Preservation Association is an important and integral part of what Old Kia Kima is today and should be included.
The following items were changed by Deflagro: 1) the "Brief History" section was renamed "History", 2) the "See also" section was renamed "External Links", 3) the word "upriver" was added to the sentence about the camp moving in 1964, 4) the sentence about the Arkansas Register of Historic Places was enhanced to include "for historical significance and local architectural style", 5) the location.
I will concede changes 1,2,3 and 4 but not 5. The location for the camp has historically and traditionally been referred to as being on the South Fork River near Hardy, Arkansas. Even the KKSR Wikipedia article lists the location as Hardy, Arkansas.
I do not understand the proposed addition of "Main article: Kia Kima Scout Reservation" when there are already other appropriate links to the KKSR article.
Regarding the counter proposal by Deflagro for the lede. ("Old Kia Kima is a youth campground near Hardy, Sharp County, Arkansas, that is listed on the Arkansas Register of Historic Places for local historical significance and local architectural style. The campground was previously the site of Kia Kima Scout Reservation, a Boy Scouts of America summer camp, and many of the historic buildings have since been restored in the original architectural style.") I do not consider myself to be an expert writer but I feel I am above average and I see these 2 sentences to be long, wordy and difficult to read. I stand by my lede as written.
I do not understand Deflagro's need to edit the text of my article when it seems he is just trying to rearrange things I have already written.
To Deflagro, I think you are too humble in the way you describe your knowledge of these topics. The extensive Wikipedia edit logs would suggest you have a wide-ranged interest in subjects in the regions around Hardy, Arkansas and West Tennessee.
This experience has shown me that what happens in Wikipedia stays in Wikipedia forever, even some of the silly things and personal information we posted on our user pages when we first joined Wikipedia. Potscamp ( talk) 13:38, 19 August 2020 (UTC)