User talk:209.244.7.245

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to Ron Jeremy, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MelicansMatkin 04:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] August 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Doxycycline, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Iain99 07:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

[edit] September 2007

Welcome to wikipedia, the comment added to Ulupi was not appropriate for Wikipedia. Please take a moment to read our welcome page. Dozols 04:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] October 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Talk:National Junior Classical League, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Corvus cornix 23:18, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gypsy Vanner Horse

Hi -

I've just seen your big edit of the Gypsy Vanner Horse page. You are clearly passionate about these animals, and I have no doubt knowledgeable, and it is that kind of detailed knowledge that Wikipedia needs.

However, I'm afraid that your edit does not match the style needed for an encyclopedia. You have also overwritten a good bit of information contributed in good faith by others, as well as some useful links.

I think there is a lot in your contribution which would help develop the article. However, there is also a lot which is not appropriate – much of this is "POV", meaning it's written from a particular "Point of View".

The idea of an encyclopedia is that anyone interested in a subject should be able to read an article and get unbiased, balanced information which can be shown to be accurate. For example, it may well be (and I'm sure it probably is) that these horses are descended partly from Shire Horses and Dales Ponies. However, we cannot say this in so many words unless we can prove it with some kind of published reference. Until we can find such a reference, we just have to leave it out, or keep for the moment to what we can show for certain, rather than what we feel must be true. For example in that case the most we could probably say might be "it has been suggested that their ancestry includes Shires and ponies such as the Dales".

An encyclopedia article also needs to be written in an impersonal style, unlike, say, that in which an enthusiasts' web page might be written. For example, charming turns of phrase like

"by necessity he was hardy, thriving on uncertain forage found at campsites as the Gypsy caravans travelled from place to place"

are perfectly appropriate on an enthusiasts' site. An alternative for an encyclopedia might be something rather duller – perhaps just "Gipsy Vanner Horses are hardy, and able to eat a wide variety of forage".

I'm afraid you may well find that your current version is soon severely edited, or even reverted wholesale (it may even have been done by the time you read this...). In fact you might think it best that you did it yourself first, to forestall others. You could then take time to think about which parts of your information can be supported by other sources, and then work those things into the existing structure of the article while keeping existing useful contributions from others.

If you feel that other people's contributions may be wrong, changing them or overwriting them straight away is not the only option. If they've said something which is unclear or which you think may not be true, you can instead insert queries in the text. Two useful ones are "clarifyme", for where text is unclear, or "fact", where a claim needs some kind of reference to support it. I've typed these here between quotes, but when editing text they are typed instead between double curly brackets: {{}}. They then produce these tags: [clarify] [citation needed]. If necessary you can also put hidden comments next to these tags, giving further detail. To do this, click on the "Insert Hidden Comment" button (fourth from the right above the edit box), then replace the word "comment" with your comment or query. This means that your comment does not interrupt the flow of the current version of the article, but it lets anyone who edits the article see your concerns in the edit box.

Good luck! --Richard New Forest 22:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to .30-30 Winchester, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: .30-30 Winchester was changed by 209.244.7.245 (u) (t) making a minor change adding "!!!" on 2008-03-05T18:52:27+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)