Hello, Vidauty, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the
Teahouse,
ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome!
Rasnaboy (
talk) 18:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Why can't I edit some particular pages?
Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are
semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible
templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only
administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been
blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.
Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?
Use the
main sandbox or
create your own personal sandbox to experiment.
How do I create an article?
See
how to create your first article, then use the
Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.
How do I create citations?
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?
A
WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See
this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Sex differences in human physiology have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Sex differences in human physiology was changed by Vidauty (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.951631 on 2022-10-04T11:14:41+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 11:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Sex differences in human physiology, you may be
blocked from editing. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Meters (
talk •
contribs) 21:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- "Vandal" sounds harsh but I suppose it is a technical term so I will try not to feel insulted. The text was clearly illogical and I was confident enuf of this to edit rather than merely commenting, but it was not clear to me how to preserve the baby while discarding the bathwater, so adding a negation seemed the best way to make the correction. I realised that the end result was untidy, and hoped to tidy it up later (or better still that someone else would). I suppose I should have explained this when I made the edit. Maybe you can advise me how to proceed. (I am assuming that it is the manner not the substance of my edit that you are rejecting.)
Vidauty (
talk) 21:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- The talk page is there if you want to dispute article content without directly editing it. Adding asides or parenthetical comments to the main article isn't the proper way to do it. I encourage you to just make changes to content you think should be changed - if it gets reverted, then take it to the talk page rather than just putting it back. See
WP:BRD,
WP:3RR.
WPscatter
t/
c 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your guidance. Another contributor ("Meters") has commented more specifically on the substance, so I will reply to them about that. On "proper ways", I accept the criticism of the way I did my original edit, but my question to you is, leaving aside the merit of my original edit, why is it valid for someone to revert my edit but not for me to revert theirs?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Did you read the pages I linked? WP:BRD, WP:3RR? Essentially, we encourage bold edits, but if someone wants it removed, then you must discuss it rather than just restoring your content; otherwise, you just end up in an edit war. If you're asking why it's that way, well, if we required discussion for every change, the wiki would be improved a lot slower. If we allowed users to just revert reversions they disagreed with ad infinitum, then no content dispute would ever get solved. WPscatter t/ c 15:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your guidance. Another contributor ("Meters") has commented more specifically on the substance, so I will reply to them about that. On "proper ways", I accept the criticism of the way I did my original edit, but my question to you is, leaving aside the merit of my original edit, why is it valid for someone to revert my edit but not for me to revert theirs?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- (ec) Yes, I specifically object to your edit. Adding your commentary contradicting the existing content is not the way to handle things. Using all caps is never appropriate, and making the same edit three times is even worse (see
WP:BRD and
WP:EW). The claim was about brain-to-body-mass-ratio, and you were commenting on brain size. Not the same thing. I have simply removed the confusing and apparently unsourced claim wrt height.
Meters (
talk) 03:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. You have removed the main passage I was reacting against, but the word "however" still implies that the study should have controlled "for differences in body size or age" (Note italic! See? I'm learning to use proper formatting!) I could remove "however", but then the whole sentence is pointless, so I am inclined to remove the whole sentence. (The "age" caveat might conceivably have some salience, but unlikely to be much, and it is not explained at all, so it looks to me like someone clutching at straws.) But "once bitten twice shy": can I proceed without stumbling over any more rules?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem with how it is currently written. The use of "however" makes perfect sense since the following sentence shows that controlling for body weight is indeed important. In any case, the article's talk page is the place to discuss this, not your talk page. Meters ( talk) 09:05, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. You have removed the main passage I was reacting against, but the word "however" still implies that the study should have controlled "for differences in body size or age" (Note italic! See? I'm learning to use proper formatting!) I could remove "however", but then the whole sentence is pointless, so I am inclined to remove the whole sentence. (The "age" caveat might conceivably have some salience, but unlikely to be much, and it is not explained at all, so it looks to me like someone clutching at straws.) But "once bitten twice shy": can I proceed without stumbling over any more rules?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- The talk page is there if you want to dispute article content without directly editing it. Adding asides or parenthetical comments to the main article isn't the proper way to do it. I encourage you to just make changes to content you think should be changed - if it gets reverted, then take it to the talk page rather than just putting it back. See
WP:BRD,
WP:3RR.
WPscatter
t/
c 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Vidauty, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the
Teahouse,
ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome!
Rasnaboy (
talk) 18:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Why can't I edit some particular pages?
Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are
semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible
templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only
administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been
blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.
Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?
Use the
main sandbox or
create your own personal sandbox to experiment.
How do I create an article?
See
how to create your first article, then use the
Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.
How do I create citations?
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?
A
WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See
this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Sex differences in human physiology have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- For help, take a look at the introduction.
- The following is the log entry regarding this message: Sex differences in human physiology was changed by Vidauty (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.951631 on 2022-10-04T11:14:41+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG ( talk) 11:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Sex differences in human physiology, you may be
blocked from editing. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Meters (
talk •
contribs) 21:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- "Vandal" sounds harsh but I suppose it is a technical term so I will try not to feel insulted. The text was clearly illogical and I was confident enuf of this to edit rather than merely commenting, but it was not clear to me how to preserve the baby while discarding the bathwater, so adding a negation seemed the best way to make the correction. I realised that the end result was untidy, and hoped to tidy it up later (or better still that someone else would). I suppose I should have explained this when I made the edit. Maybe you can advise me how to proceed. (I am assuming that it is the manner not the substance of my edit that you are rejecting.)
Vidauty (
talk) 21:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- The talk page is there if you want to dispute article content without directly editing it. Adding asides or parenthetical comments to the main article isn't the proper way to do it. I encourage you to just make changes to content you think should be changed - if it gets reverted, then take it to the talk page rather than just putting it back. See
WP:BRD,
WP:3RR.
WPscatter
t/
c 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your guidance. Another contributor ("Meters") has commented more specifically on the substance, so I will reply to them about that. On "proper ways", I accept the criticism of the way I did my original edit, but my question to you is, leaving aside the merit of my original edit, why is it valid for someone to revert my edit but not for me to revert theirs?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Did you read the pages I linked? WP:BRD, WP:3RR? Essentially, we encourage bold edits, but if someone wants it removed, then you must discuss it rather than just restoring your content; otherwise, you just end up in an edit war. If you're asking why it's that way, well, if we required discussion for every change, the wiki would be improved a lot slower. If we allowed users to just revert reversions they disagreed with ad infinitum, then no content dispute would ever get solved. WPscatter t/ c 15:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your guidance. Another contributor ("Meters") has commented more specifically on the substance, so I will reply to them about that. On "proper ways", I accept the criticism of the way I did my original edit, but my question to you is, leaving aside the merit of my original edit, why is it valid for someone to revert my edit but not for me to revert theirs?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- (ec) Yes, I specifically object to your edit. Adding your commentary contradicting the existing content is not the way to handle things. Using all caps is never appropriate, and making the same edit three times is even worse (see
WP:BRD and
WP:EW). The claim was about brain-to-body-mass-ratio, and you were commenting on brain size. Not the same thing. I have simply removed the confusing and apparently unsourced claim wrt height.
Meters (
talk) 03:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. You have removed the main passage I was reacting against, but the word "however" still implies that the study should have controlled "for differences in body size or age" (Note italic! See? I'm learning to use proper formatting!) I could remove "however", but then the whole sentence is pointless, so I am inclined to remove the whole sentence. (The "age" caveat might conceivably have some salience, but unlikely to be much, and it is not explained at all, so it looks to me like someone clutching at straws.) But "once bitten twice shy": can I proceed without stumbling over any more rules?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem with how it is currently written. The use of "however" makes perfect sense since the following sentence shows that controlling for body weight is indeed important. In any case, the article's talk page is the place to discuss this, not your talk page. Meters ( talk) 09:05, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. You have removed the main passage I was reacting against, but the word "however" still implies that the study should have controlled "for differences in body size or age" (Note italic! See? I'm learning to use proper formatting!) I could remove "however", but then the whole sentence is pointless, so I am inclined to remove the whole sentence. (The "age" caveat might conceivably have some salience, but unlikely to be much, and it is not explained at all, so it looks to me like someone clutching at straws.) But "once bitten twice shy": can I proceed without stumbling over any more rules?
Vidauty (
talk) 08:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- The talk page is there if you want to dispute article content without directly editing it. Adding asides or parenthetical comments to the main article isn't the proper way to do it. I encourage you to just make changes to content you think should be changed - if it gets reverted, then take it to the talk page rather than just putting it back. See
WP:BRD,
WP:3RR.
WPscatter
t/
c 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)