|
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for
your contributions. One of the
core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a
neutral point of view. A contribution you made to
Animal-assisted therapy appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you.
I've moved your contributions to the article's talk page. I hope you'll join the discussion there, and continue to work on improving the article. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I've asked for help on the article, since I don't have the time necessary to go through it all. Overall, you're doing a great job, but you really need someone to guide you around what is and is not appropriate for encyclopedia articles. WP:TMM might be helpful in the meantime. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Since you seem to be in a rush, I've started some extremely cursory comments. Please don't take any of it personally. I simply don't have the time to work on this in the detail that's needed. -- Ronz ( talk) 00:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Where is the article with your comments? I can't get to it, sorry I must be wiki dumb!--
Charles danten (
talk) 00:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Talk:Animal-assisted_therapy#Discussion_on_proposal_above -- Ronz ( talk) 02:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've done some further changes. See what you think. Thanks-- Charles danten ( talk) 11:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I can't find my latest version sorry Ronz!
I have also commented dolphin therapy after Nathason's comments. -- Charles danten ( talk) 11:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please stop editing your proposal once editors have commented on it per WP:REDACT. You need to discuss your intentions and rationale and respond to the comments there.
- I wrote, "Generally, criticism sections are inappropriate per NPOV. The material should instead be incorporated with the relevant information following NPOV and MEDRS." Because you've not commented in any way, I don't know if you've read this, if you agree, or if you're trying to address the concerns in any manner at all. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Again, I wish I had time to guide you through all this. I'm going to cut to the chase now: Have you looked at WP:MEDRS? The article needs pretty much a complete rewrite per MEDRS. We need to start by assessing the sources we have, including those you've introduced in your proposals, and search for better ones. -- Ronz ( talk) 06:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Message added 18:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Dougweller ( talk) 18:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I recovered your comment, moving it to the article talk page. I hope this is what you had intended. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
you asked for notification. IRWolfie- ( talk) 21:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Charles, thanks for your contributions to the Animal-assisted therapy page. It's great to have an expert in the discussion, however I've often observed how experts in a subject who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's rules can find things a bit frustrating.
- The most important thing - What matters the most is what reliable secondary sources you can bring to a discussion. This is even more important than what you know about a topic.
- I can appreciate that this seems a little bizzarre, as you might find a lay-person disputing you on a topic which you may have studied professionally for many years. I'd urge you to abide with the process which is all about maximizing verifiability. As somebody familiar with topics of animal welfare I'm sure you will have knowledge of sources (both online and offline) - this is the most important resource for making your point effectivly. -- Salimfadhley ( talk) 22:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
or
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk) 22:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Charles danten. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
|
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for
your contributions. One of the
core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a
neutral point of view. A contribution you made to
Animal-assisted therapy appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you.
I've moved your contributions to the article's talk page. I hope you'll join the discussion there, and continue to work on improving the article. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I've asked for help on the article, since I don't have the time necessary to go through it all. Overall, you're doing a great job, but you really need someone to guide you around what is and is not appropriate for encyclopedia articles. WP:TMM might be helpful in the meantime. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Since you seem to be in a rush, I've started some extremely cursory comments. Please don't take any of it personally. I simply don't have the time to work on this in the detail that's needed. -- Ronz ( talk) 00:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Where is the article with your comments? I can't get to it, sorry I must be wiki dumb!--
Charles danten (
talk) 00:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Talk:Animal-assisted_therapy#Discussion_on_proposal_above -- Ronz ( talk) 02:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've done some further changes. See what you think. Thanks-- Charles danten ( talk) 11:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I can't find my latest version sorry Ronz!
I have also commented dolphin therapy after Nathason's comments. -- Charles danten ( talk) 11:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please stop editing your proposal once editors have commented on it per WP:REDACT. You need to discuss your intentions and rationale and respond to the comments there.
- I wrote, "Generally, criticism sections are inappropriate per NPOV. The material should instead be incorporated with the relevant information following NPOV and MEDRS." Because you've not commented in any way, I don't know if you've read this, if you agree, or if you're trying to address the concerns in any manner at all. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Again, I wish I had time to guide you through all this. I'm going to cut to the chase now: Have you looked at WP:MEDRS? The article needs pretty much a complete rewrite per MEDRS. We need to start by assessing the sources we have, including those you've introduced in your proposals, and search for better ones. -- Ronz ( talk) 06:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Message added 18:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Dougweller ( talk) 18:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I recovered your comment, moving it to the article talk page. I hope this is what you had intended. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
you asked for notification. IRWolfie- ( talk) 21:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Charles, thanks for your contributions to the Animal-assisted therapy page. It's great to have an expert in the discussion, however I've often observed how experts in a subject who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's rules can find things a bit frustrating.
- The most important thing - What matters the most is what reliable secondary sources you can bring to a discussion. This is even more important than what you know about a topic.
- I can appreciate that this seems a little bizzarre, as you might find a lay-person disputing you on a topic which you may have studied professionally for many years. I'd urge you to abide with the process which is all about maximizing verifiability. As somebody familiar with topics of animal welfare I'm sure you will have knowledge of sources (both online and offline) - this is the most important resource for making your point effectivly. -- Salimfadhley ( talk) 22:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button
or
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --
SineBot (
talk) 22:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Charles danten. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)