Hi Femke 01! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! -- đŠDrWho42 đ» 08:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey @ Femke 01,
Thanks for your rewrite of the lead on the phenomenology article!
(Technically, the lead is supposed to be a selective summary of the article to follow, so that the article itself is the source. It would be entirely perverse, however, to insist that an incomplete and undersourced article cannot have a well-written lead supported by scholarly sources.)
Do you have any intentions (or interest) in doing further work on the body of the article? Is so, maybe check in on its Talk page so that we're not working at cross-purposes as I continue my edits.
I don't have any particular vision for the article beyond just making it not awful. So you could work on just whatever parts you like without, I don't imagine, any gruff from me.
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh ( talk) 18:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thank you for creating Logical grammar. It's very detailed and I can see you worked hard on it. :) Clovermossđ (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC) |
Hi Femke 01! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! -- đŠDrWho42 đ» 08:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey @ Femke 01,
Thanks for your rewrite of the lead on the phenomenology article!
(Technically, the lead is supposed to be a selective summary of the article to follow, so that the article itself is the source. It would be entirely perverse, however, to insist that an incomplete and undersourced article cannot have a well-written lead supported by scholarly sources.)
Do you have any intentions (or interest) in doing further work on the body of the article? Is so, maybe check in on its Talk page so that we're not working at cross-purposes as I continue my edits.
I don't have any particular vision for the article beyond just making it not awful. So you could work on just whatever parts you like without, I don't imagine, any gruff from me.
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh ( talk) 18:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thank you for creating Logical grammar. It's very detailed and I can see you worked hard on it. :) Clovermossđ (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC) |