![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
We created this article in good faith, and with very little experience of Wiki-Ethics. We are very concerned now that our article has been tagged in this way. This sort of tagging is a rather heavy-handed approach, especially when the editor was never contacted. A more dialogic approach seems to be more in line with Wiki guidelines.
From the wikipedia guidelines:
"Assuming good faith is about intention, not action. Well-meaning people make mistakes, and you should correct (but not scold) them when they do."
No-one ever discussed this situation with us. Again, from the wikipedia guidelines:
"The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline."
Where do we go from here? We would like to make changes to the page that are more in line with Wiki guidelines.
Also, the page now has proper footnotes and most of the information is from third-party publications.
Marioscido
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
We created this article in good faith, and with very little experience of Wiki-Ethics. We are very concerned now that our article has been tagged in this way. This sort of tagging is a rather heavy-handed approach, especially when the editor was never contacted. A more dialogic approach seems to be more in line with Wiki guidelines.
From the wikipedia guidelines:
"Assuming good faith is about intention, not action. Well-meaning people make mistakes, and you should correct (but not scold) them when they do."
No-one ever discussed this situation with us. Again, from the wikipedia guidelines:
"The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline."
Where do we go from here? We would like to make changes to the page that are more in line with Wiki guidelines.
Also, the page now has proper footnotes and most of the information is from third-party publications.
Marioscido