User talk:Cherylktardif

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
Archive 1

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Cherylktardif, 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
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 05:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Line

[edit] Follow up

Hi. It was very nice to arrive and be greeted by a smile. Instant karma! I take your point that the post you refer to is personal and unwelcome. As you pointed out, it's "newbie" territory, and I'm trying to extend the easiest way forward for everyone. If your copybook was clean, you would have a stronger case, but it's probably best not to open Pandora's Box (if you'll excuse the sequential incongruity of images there). As I pointed out VANITY edits do tend to get under some people's skin, and then they get extended some tolerance for that situation. Furthermore, altering someone else's talk is considered vandalism. You didn't know that of course, which I accept, and that's why I don't feel the need to act on it.

Correspondingly, I assume that Lgh was also not aware of the primacy that is placed on NPA. There has been an apology for tone, not content. In other words, a criticism was meant, but the manner of it was wrong. We do allow criticism and it's safe if this is directed to the edit, and not the editor, to the idea and not the embodier of that idea. And, yes, CIVIL is expected. As I said, in the normal course of events, talk should not be altered, although there is latitude for deleting personal attacks, so you could go ahead and do it, if you felt confident of putting your case if challenged. One way is to put a place holder, as in [personal attack removed] for the offending portion(s).

However, this may achieve the opposite to what you intend. When I read the post, I didn't experience a lowering of your estimation in my eyes. It was the poster upon whom it reflected badly, and this is how it would be generally read. In addition, it may be more viable to leave it there as "evidence" for any recurrence. Of course, it will still be in the history, but a third party, perhaps an investigating admin, is not likely to find it there. By leaving it, it also enables the whole thread to be followed properly.

Victoriagirl has not edited since I put my generic message on her page, and I think she will probably archive, as you have. The message will therefore be hidden anyway from gaze. I would recommend leaving it like that. There's nothing to pursue in terms of blocks etc, because that wouldn't be given. The other user has apologised. A warning has been given. Usually there are up to 4 warnings before a block, although it can be less. We like to give people a chance to get it right. You may, as another alternative, ask Lgh to strike the portions she wishes to withdraw, but putting <s> in front and </s> after, which will draw a line (try it!). This has the advantage of showing its withdrawal, while preserving the record.

In any event, it would not be acceptable to reword the comment, as it would then distort the record of events, which may be necessary to examine in the future.

Yes, sometimes people are impatient with new users, probably because they do not realise you are a new user, or they have mistaken an error for vandalism. It is easy enough to explain that the action was genuine, but that you are still a new user.

Tyrenius 05:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope everyone involved in the fracas will be able to move on with a better understanding of how to work in wiki. There's a bit of a learning curve, but we AGF unless the contrary is proved. Yes, there's some great behaviour on wiki! Maybe useful material for a book... However, there are many more fine, intelligent and helpful individuals, so it's just a matter of building up contacts. Wiki is a remarkable social and cultural phenomenon, which has already made history. It is amazing how widely it is now used, so it's important to maintain the highest standard for articles. Copy-editing, for one thing, is always valuable input from skilled writers.

As you are currently editing under your own name, you might consider opening an account with a pseudonym. This could be instead of your main account, or in addition to. However, if it is the latter, then it's important to maintain a rigid demarcation between the two, and they should never participate in the same article, voting process and so on. It would be useful if you wanted to contribute to subjects where you might not want your public persona to be identified, for example. However, you are welcome to carry on editing exactly as present, if you prefer. You can have fun exploring barnstars at Wikipedia:Barnstars and linked pages! If you need any further help or advice, let me know. Tyrenius 20:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for prettifying my page and for the cool archive graphic at the top! All the best!:) (Cherylktardif 02:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC))