User talk:Sarahba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Sarahba, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• 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:Where to ask a question, 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!  JoJan 15:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You wanted help on NPOV

The idea behind NPOV is that you try to find a compromise between two different views. It often means that you discuss both sides without taking a stand. Is there a particular topic which you want to talk about. Dr Debug (Talk) 18:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

More specific:

So let's see. Let's talk about "Global Warming". Some people will say that there is Global Warming going on right now and other people will dimish that. So you have to specific:

According to professor X global warming is taking place [ http://somesite ], but professor Y disagrees with that [ http://someothersite ].

That way you have shown both sides. One of the things which will help is to avoid words like "greastest", "best", "terrible" etc.

If you wrote a story and somebody else disagree then you can try to use the talk page to find a compromise.

There is a long story at: Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial

Hope that'll help a bit ;) Dr Debug (Talk) 18:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Copied from my talk page for your specific problem:

What you would do is according to company ... as far as putting in the response. Factual errors can be corrected, but it has to be a real error. In general the best thing is to keep both sides of the story. So keep the first part and then tell the story according to the view of the company. Dr Debug (Talk) 18:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Corporate response" sections in Vector Marketing

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Could you please stop adding the "corporate response" sections to the Vector Marketing article? They are highly unorthodox; if you see any article on any other corporation, they do not contain "corporate response" sections. I noticed in your messages to Dr Debug that you said you work for Vector. If you would like to add what you feel to be the company's perspective to the article, feel free. But setting aside separate sections throughout the article isn't the preferred way to go about this task. It has a negative effect on the article's layout and readability, and makes it read like a "point-counterpoint" argument, which is not how an encyclopedia article is normally structured. This is why I've reverted your edits, not because I have anything personally against the opinions you expressed. Szyslak ( [ +t, +c, +m, +e ]) 17:54, 11 February 2006 (UTC)