Hello, SnarkyDragon, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
- Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
- and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on
talk pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our
help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on
my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome!
Just Step Sideways
from this world ..... today
19:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I noticed
these additions of yours to the article on
Skipness. You have added a considerable amount of material that may be true but leaves readers with no way to
verify that because you have cited no sources. To take just one example, you say It arguably provides some of the finest views of the unspoilt Kintyre coast and the Isle of Arran.
Who said that? You? Perhaps you are quoting some published source (the only material that should be included in Wikipedia articles), but that's not clear. Please read some of the links in the Welcome message above, especially
this bit and
this important policy.
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
11:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Mike - thanks for flagging. I'm trying to contribute to Wikipedia but finding there seems to be an attitude of jumping upon contributors and adding barriers and criticism rather than guiding or helping. Even lately I've faced the attitude of mods being volunteers with no duty to help - what then the article writers who also aren't paid and do things in their own time? How to learn to edit Wikipedia but not be jumped upon straight away? There is an attitude there which worries me when I'm simply trying to contribute good quality information. Some facts are based on local knowledge and putting links to everything can then look like plugging a business which I wouldn't want to do because that's also at odds with Wiki. I like the aims of Wiki but not sure I see it in some of the way support is provided here. I also have outstanding issues with trying to create a new article but again being jumped upon rather than supported.
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
12:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of points. There are no "mods" here. The content of the encyclopaedia (as opposed to its Talk Pages) is determined by a consensus in which there is no hierarchy: most people contribute under a pseudonym and none of us can know whether we are discussing content with a world expert on the topic or a child of five and
administrators have no more right to determine content than anyone else. That said, everyone is expected to abide by the well-developed
policies and guidelines that have been built up now for over 20 years. One of these is that we don't allow
original research, so your suggestion that you have added
facts [that] are based on local knowledge
will immediately raise the hackles of long-term editors and as a result you may feeljumped upon
. By policy, all the facts mentioned in articles have to be backed up by reliable published sources, or those passages of text can be reverted (and are likely to be so quickly in the case of well-watched articles). Opinions, such as whether the Kintyre coast is unspoilt, have no place at all except as part of relevant quotations. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a travel guide. Mike Turnbull ( talk) 13:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)- But then why not mention and support rather than jump upon and say things have no place? How does that encourage people to engage constructively?
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
13:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what we strive to do when we assist at the Teahouse, Help desk, or via the mentoring scheme. However, none of us is perfect and I suspect that your chosen username didn't help get things off to a good start as others responded to your questions!
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
13:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- How bizarre though if people fixate on user names? That isn’t suggesting a positive culture on wiki is it? I also did a quick look around toxicity within wiki and it does seem to be an issue which is really making me see wiki in a new and less favourable light. SnarkyDragon ( talk) 13:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what we strive to do when we assist at the Teahouse, Help desk, or via the mentoring scheme. However, none of us is perfect and I suspect that your chosen username didn't help get things off to a good start as others responded to your questions!
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
13:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- But then why not mention and support rather than jump upon and say things have no place? How does that encourage people to engage constructively?
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
13:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of points. There are no "mods" here. The content of the encyclopaedia (as opposed to its Talk Pages) is determined by a consensus in which there is no hierarchy: most people contribute under a pseudonym and none of us can know whether we are discussing content with a world expert on the topic or a child of five and
administrators have no more right to determine content than anyone else. That said, everyone is expected to abide by the well-developed
policies and guidelines that have been built up now for over 20 years. One of these is that we don't allow
original research, so your suggestion that you have added
Hello, SnarkyDragon, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
- Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
- and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on
talk pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our
help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on
my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome!
Just Step Sideways
from this world ..... today
19:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I noticed
these additions of yours to the article on
Skipness. You have added a considerable amount of material that may be true but leaves readers with no way to
verify that because you have cited no sources. To take just one example, you say It arguably provides some of the finest views of the unspoilt Kintyre coast and the Isle of Arran.
Who said that? You? Perhaps you are quoting some published source (the only material that should be included in Wikipedia articles), but that's not clear. Please read some of the links in the Welcome message above, especially
this bit and
this important policy.
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
11:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Mike - thanks for flagging. I'm trying to contribute to Wikipedia but finding there seems to be an attitude of jumping upon contributors and adding barriers and criticism rather than guiding or helping. Even lately I've faced the attitude of mods being volunteers with no duty to help - what then the article writers who also aren't paid and do things in their own time? How to learn to edit Wikipedia but not be jumped upon straight away? There is an attitude there which worries me when I'm simply trying to contribute good quality information. Some facts are based on local knowledge and putting links to everything can then look like plugging a business which I wouldn't want to do because that's also at odds with Wiki. I like the aims of Wiki but not sure I see it in some of the way support is provided here. I also have outstanding issues with trying to create a new article but again being jumped upon rather than supported.
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
12:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of points. There are no "mods" here. The content of the encyclopaedia (as opposed to its Talk Pages) is determined by a consensus in which there is no hierarchy: most people contribute under a pseudonym and none of us can know whether we are discussing content with a world expert on the topic or a child of five and
administrators have no more right to determine content than anyone else. That said, everyone is expected to abide by the well-developed
policies and guidelines that have been built up now for over 20 years. One of these is that we don't allow
original research, so your suggestion that you have added
facts [that] are based on local knowledge
will immediately raise the hackles of long-term editors and as a result you may feeljumped upon
. By policy, all the facts mentioned in articles have to be backed up by reliable published sources, or those passages of text can be reverted (and are likely to be so quickly in the case of well-watched articles). Opinions, such as whether the Kintyre coast is unspoilt, have no place at all except as part of relevant quotations. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a travel guide. Mike Turnbull ( talk) 13:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)- But then why not mention and support rather than jump upon and say things have no place? How does that encourage people to engage constructively?
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
13:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what we strive to do when we assist at the Teahouse, Help desk, or via the mentoring scheme. However, none of us is perfect and I suspect that your chosen username didn't help get things off to a good start as others responded to your questions!
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
13:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- How bizarre though if people fixate on user names? That isn’t suggesting a positive culture on wiki is it? I also did a quick look around toxicity within wiki and it does seem to be an issue which is really making me see wiki in a new and less favourable light. SnarkyDragon ( talk) 13:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what we strive to do when we assist at the Teahouse, Help desk, or via the mentoring scheme. However, none of us is perfect and I suspect that your chosen username didn't help get things off to a good start as others responded to your questions!
Mike Turnbull (
talk)
13:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- But then why not mention and support rather than jump upon and say things have no place? How does that encourage people to engage constructively?
SnarkyDragon (
talk)
13:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of points. There are no "mods" here. The content of the encyclopaedia (as opposed to its Talk Pages) is determined by a consensus in which there is no hierarchy: most people contribute under a pseudonym and none of us can know whether we are discussing content with a world expert on the topic or a child of five and
administrators have no more right to determine content than anyone else. That said, everyone is expected to abide by the well-developed
policies and guidelines that have been built up now for over 20 years. One of these is that we don't allow
original research, so your suggestion that you have added