Welcome!
Hello, Raa18123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
William M. Connolley (
talk) 18:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
For: William M. Connolley, regarding the Tritype page redirect
I would like to discuss the redirects that you've been putting on the Tritype page....I understand that the subject of Tritype is connected to the Enneagram, but it is, in and of itself, a separate topic than the theory of the Enneagram in its entirety. I also have not had luck in the past with including information on the Enneagram page, and there is an extensive amount of information that can be shared on Tritype that would frankly be best displayed on its own page. I can make a subcategory on the Enneagram page and then link to the separate Tritype page if that would keep you from redirecting it again? To be honest, I am somewhat frustrated that the information being put out there keeps disappearing.....
Raa18123 ( talk) 21:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
- It is possible to talk on the Tritype page ( Talk:Tritype) but I appreciate that might be hard to find for a novice (if you go to the trityp page, you are redirected. If you then click on the "redirect from..." link you get back to the tritype, and can use the talk page).
- Note that I didn't do the initial redirect; that was User:DreamGuy [1]; you might want to notify him.
- Incidentally, when you first created the page [2] it was 10k long, which is unusual. That makes me think it is likely that you copied it from elsewhere; is that so?
- As to the substance: the problem is that it is not clear that the tritype is notable. The only refs given are to the creator; there are no secondary refs at all. If the creator were notable, the concept might have a place on her page, but that isn't clear William M. Connolley ( talk) 07:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- First of all, thank you William M. Connolley for your response. Second, I actually was aware that it was possible to talk on the Tritype page, however I figured since I was the one doing most of the posting and editing that it would be relevant to discuss the issue on my page, especially given that the Tritype page has been redirected altogether.
- I am aware that you didn't participate in the initial redirect, but since you're the latest moderator to have implemented the redirect, I decided to discuss it with you first. I figured if we talked about it, and came to some kind of conclusion, that would be evident to the other moderators as well. Would it be more prudent for me to have this conversation with User:DreamGuy first?
- Thinking back on it, I can now see how the length of the page might have led you to believe that it was from elsewhere, since I'm assuming most pages gain their length over time. However, no, that is not the case for this page. My business partner and I are actually Enneagram coaches, and we have been teaching this Tritype theory for quite some time, so together we composed the information and I have posted it. I apologize for any confusion on that issue. While the information is based on what the Fauvre's state in their Tritype booklet, it is composed with originality and you will not find it anywhere else.
- I understand what you're saying completely, and I am working on coming up with more outside sources for the information. The problem is that this particular theory, and the Enneagram teachers who came up with it, are very popular within the Enneagram community, so there has been somewhat of a demand for more accessible, general information on the topic. However, I can understand how to an outsider it might appear as though this information is of little importance.
- My next question would be this: There are outside sources that refer to the Fauvres (the teachers who came up with the Tritype theory), however it is in reference to a different aspect of the Enneagram. Would these references add validity to this topic, just as an illustration that these teachers are known and respected within the community?
- Thank you very much in advance for your assistance - I am very dedicated to getting this information out there, and I appreciate the time you've taken to assist me in the matter.
- PS. I just wanted to add that I have already attempted to add information before to the Enneagram page, and it was heavily edited, and then eventually taken down altogether - that's part of the reason that I believe it would be beneficial for this theory to have its own page. There are others in the Enneagram community that don't necessarily want it associated with the Enneagram, however, the theory is out there and there is plenty of information on it as well as the teachers who have developed it. I have no problem briefly mentioning it on the Enneagram page in order to link it over to the Tritype page, however I think that adding this information to the Enneagram page will only make putting up this information more difficult. What are your thoughts on this? Raa18123 ( talk) 01:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- I think that until you have some reasonable secondary sources, you're going to have problems. Perhaps the key is "there has been somewhat of a demand for more accessible, general information on the topic": wiki isn't here just for your publicity (is that part of WP:NOT? Not directly, perhaps) (ps that sounds harsher than I meant it to; you understand what I mean, I hope). So if your main purpose is just to make the info available, then a public web site, blog, or whatever would be a good choice. Bear in mind that I'm just one opinion; you can ask elsewhere. I'm not sure where, though, so you could try Wikipedia:Village pump where you might at least be directed to the right place William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you've seen them yet or not, but I just added several secondary sources last night. Of course I will continue to add sources as I find decent ones, but I believe that the ones I've put up at least illustrate that this theory is out there and known by more people than just myself.
- As far as your comment about publicity, this isn't my theory so it's not giving me any publicity whatsoever. I understand what you're saying, but just know that I am not creating this page for any sort of personal gain/profit. I just love the Enneagram! I am heavily involved in the larger Enneagram community (meaning not just message boards and coaching, but also attending the IEA conferences, various trainings, etc.) and this is a prominent and notable theory within that community. All I'm saying is that it is notable and known, and it has been around for some time now. In other words, to me it clearly qualifies for having its own page. To be fair, I've seen pages for far less notable things.
- There are plenty of web sites, discussion forums, blogs, etc. out there already regarding all aspects of the Enneagram, however we both know that Wikipedia is one of the most popular and sought out sources for overviews, and it doesn't seem illogical to me to want to add this information to it, especially given that the Enneagram has its own page.
- Of course I'm sure there are limitless moderators and Wiki users that I could talk to, but I figured it would make the most sense to the start with the ones who have been actively editing the page first. If I can attempt to fix/work on the issues that you have with the page, then perhaps I can avoid having the same conversation with someone else who might be of the same opinion as you are. Then next time around, I can address totally different issues. Just trying to make the page acceptable enough to keep up and stationary, so that I (and others) can add more content and improve as necessary.
- Again, thank you for all the help you've given so far, and it would mean a lot to me if you could look at the edits I put on the page last night, and let me know if there's anything else you think I might need to do to keep it from getting redirected again. Many thanks. Raa18123 ( talk) 20:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- *Also, maybe if I renamed it "Enneagram Tritype" so that it would appear on the disambiguation page?
Welcome!
Hello, Raa18123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
William M. Connolley (
talk) 18:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
For: William M. Connolley, regarding the Tritype page redirect
I would like to discuss the redirects that you've been putting on the Tritype page....I understand that the subject of Tritype is connected to the Enneagram, but it is, in and of itself, a separate topic than the theory of the Enneagram in its entirety. I also have not had luck in the past with including information on the Enneagram page, and there is an extensive amount of information that can be shared on Tritype that would frankly be best displayed on its own page. I can make a subcategory on the Enneagram page and then link to the separate Tritype page if that would keep you from redirecting it again? To be honest, I am somewhat frustrated that the information being put out there keeps disappearing.....
Raa18123 ( talk) 21:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
- It is possible to talk on the Tritype page ( Talk:Tritype) but I appreciate that might be hard to find for a novice (if you go to the trityp page, you are redirected. If you then click on the "redirect from..." link you get back to the tritype, and can use the talk page).
- Note that I didn't do the initial redirect; that was User:DreamGuy [1]; you might want to notify him.
- Incidentally, when you first created the page [2] it was 10k long, which is unusual. That makes me think it is likely that you copied it from elsewhere; is that so?
- As to the substance: the problem is that it is not clear that the tritype is notable. The only refs given are to the creator; there are no secondary refs at all. If the creator were notable, the concept might have a place on her page, but that isn't clear William M. Connolley ( talk) 07:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- First of all, thank you William M. Connolley for your response. Second, I actually was aware that it was possible to talk on the Tritype page, however I figured since I was the one doing most of the posting and editing that it would be relevant to discuss the issue on my page, especially given that the Tritype page has been redirected altogether.
- I am aware that you didn't participate in the initial redirect, but since you're the latest moderator to have implemented the redirect, I decided to discuss it with you first. I figured if we talked about it, and came to some kind of conclusion, that would be evident to the other moderators as well. Would it be more prudent for me to have this conversation with User:DreamGuy first?
- Thinking back on it, I can now see how the length of the page might have led you to believe that it was from elsewhere, since I'm assuming most pages gain their length over time. However, no, that is not the case for this page. My business partner and I are actually Enneagram coaches, and we have been teaching this Tritype theory for quite some time, so together we composed the information and I have posted it. I apologize for any confusion on that issue. While the information is based on what the Fauvre's state in their Tritype booklet, it is composed with originality and you will not find it anywhere else.
- I understand what you're saying completely, and I am working on coming up with more outside sources for the information. The problem is that this particular theory, and the Enneagram teachers who came up with it, are very popular within the Enneagram community, so there has been somewhat of a demand for more accessible, general information on the topic. However, I can understand how to an outsider it might appear as though this information is of little importance.
- My next question would be this: There are outside sources that refer to the Fauvres (the teachers who came up with the Tritype theory), however it is in reference to a different aspect of the Enneagram. Would these references add validity to this topic, just as an illustration that these teachers are known and respected within the community?
- Thank you very much in advance for your assistance - I am very dedicated to getting this information out there, and I appreciate the time you've taken to assist me in the matter.
- PS. I just wanted to add that I have already attempted to add information before to the Enneagram page, and it was heavily edited, and then eventually taken down altogether - that's part of the reason that I believe it would be beneficial for this theory to have its own page. There are others in the Enneagram community that don't necessarily want it associated with the Enneagram, however, the theory is out there and there is plenty of information on it as well as the teachers who have developed it. I have no problem briefly mentioning it on the Enneagram page in order to link it over to the Tritype page, however I think that adding this information to the Enneagram page will only make putting up this information more difficult. What are your thoughts on this? Raa18123 ( talk) 01:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- I think that until you have some reasonable secondary sources, you're going to have problems. Perhaps the key is "there has been somewhat of a demand for more accessible, general information on the topic": wiki isn't here just for your publicity (is that part of WP:NOT? Not directly, perhaps) (ps that sounds harsher than I meant it to; you understand what I mean, I hope). So if your main purpose is just to make the info available, then a public web site, blog, or whatever would be a good choice. Bear in mind that I'm just one opinion; you can ask elsewhere. I'm not sure where, though, so you could try Wikipedia:Village pump where you might at least be directed to the right place William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you've seen them yet or not, but I just added several secondary sources last night. Of course I will continue to add sources as I find decent ones, but I believe that the ones I've put up at least illustrate that this theory is out there and known by more people than just myself.
- As far as your comment about publicity, this isn't my theory so it's not giving me any publicity whatsoever. I understand what you're saying, but just know that I am not creating this page for any sort of personal gain/profit. I just love the Enneagram! I am heavily involved in the larger Enneagram community (meaning not just message boards and coaching, but also attending the IEA conferences, various trainings, etc.) and this is a prominent and notable theory within that community. All I'm saying is that it is notable and known, and it has been around for some time now. In other words, to me it clearly qualifies for having its own page. To be fair, I've seen pages for far less notable things.
- There are plenty of web sites, discussion forums, blogs, etc. out there already regarding all aspects of the Enneagram, however we both know that Wikipedia is one of the most popular and sought out sources for overviews, and it doesn't seem illogical to me to want to add this information to it, especially given that the Enneagram has its own page.
- Of course I'm sure there are limitless moderators and Wiki users that I could talk to, but I figured it would make the most sense to the start with the ones who have been actively editing the page first. If I can attempt to fix/work on the issues that you have with the page, then perhaps I can avoid having the same conversation with someone else who might be of the same opinion as you are. Then next time around, I can address totally different issues. Just trying to make the page acceptable enough to keep up and stationary, so that I (and others) can add more content and improve as necessary.
- Again, thank you for all the help you've given so far, and it would mean a lot to me if you could look at the edits I put on the page last night, and let me know if there's anything else you think I might need to do to keep it from getting redirected again. Many thanks. Raa18123 ( talk) 20:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- *Also, maybe if I renamed it "Enneagram Tritype" so that it would appear on the disambiguation page?