User talk:R.J.Oosterbaan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, R.J.Oosterbaan, 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:

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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --Merovingian (T, C, E) 20:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] No original research policy

From: R.J.Oosterbaan 19:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
To: mwtoews
You wrote: Hi, I've noticed your edits in the groundwater related articles. However, they infringe on Wikipedia's no original research policy (especially since you tagged on the talk pages "This article was made by ..."). These articles include Watertable control, Groundwater model, Salinity control, and Cumulative frequency; as well as certain sections of other articles. I don't want to be a jerk and list you articles for deletion (some people here would do that .. but not me), as they could be used and merged among other wiki authors. Your contributions to the small niche of groundwater-related articles are certainly welcome, however you should first consider the policies of Wikipedia before investing too much time and effort.+mwtoews 18:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
My reply: I am new to Wikipedia (a few days) and already in trouble. I have tried to do merging but was hitherto unable to do so (with 2 exceptions) because I felt there would be too much interruption of the train of thought in the pages visited. Yet, I will not rest, but continue to do streamlining. I fear some misunderstanding might have been roused by the phrase "This article was made by R.J.Oosterbaan". Herewith I only refer to the entry in Wikipedia (a new page), not to new or original research articles. All information I give comes from old research and existing sources and I am just reporting, referring, citing and pouring available knowledge into a new format, hoping to provide useful information. I guess I am not expected to make contributions merely by "copy and paste" from existing material, omitting any writing and "glueing" on my part. In fact, I could not detect much difference between the approach to the subjects in the pages I viewed and my approach, although there may be a lot of difference in style and emphasis everywhere. To avoid any more misunderstandings, I will remove the phrase, which was meant to assume some kind of responsibility for what I did and be open for comments. I might also adopt a fancy name (something like yours) to "depersonify" my contributions. By the way, do you have some authority in Wikipedia and what do you mean with "here" in (some people here would do that ...)"? Regards, Roland.

From: mwtoews

Hey, everyone was once new here, so no worries if you feel your are "already in trouble", so don't be discouraged about contributing. It can take a few months to get a good idea of how Wikipedia works from the inside (especially if you also want to learn the technical aspects, like including LaTeX math formulas). I can see the work you added is not exactly original research, but it is in paper format, rather than in more of a encyclopedia reference format. I have no more authority here than you; I just contribute whenever I have spare time and resources (I'm working on my Masters at the moment—so my spare time is presently limited). My username really isn't that fancy, since it is must my first two initials and last name, and is the exact same used at my past two universities. (Using any part of a real name in a username is actually quite bold, and I certainly encourage it.) In any case, your work is always credited through the additions in the history—but due to the licensing, it is free and public domain for anyone use to use and modify, so this distinction gets blurred or lost with each edit from someone else. There are about a dozen or so regular contributers on wikipedia that are specialists with groundwater—non of which I know personally, and only discuss things here and there. By "here", I meant the larger wikipedia community—some of which don't tolerate deviation from policies and delete or remove material that doesn't meet it. Feel free to ask me any questions you might have.+mwtoews 21:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who made what changes

Regarding your question in Talk:Salinity control, you can look at the "history" of any page to see a record of every change and who made it. For example, in [1], you can click on the "last" link next to any timestamp and see what change was made by it. This edit history also includes the edit-summary for each change, which is why it's polite for editors to say what their change is. Indeed it's possible to hide one's identity somewhat, but if absolutely necessary, Wikipedia admins can figure out whether several usernames are actually the same person or whether an anonymous IP is "the same" as a certain account-name. DMacks 00:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Segmented regression

I replied on my talk page. – Quadell (talk) (random) 16:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tag

I removed the wikify tag on Well drainage upon my second look. The tag just means it needs significant cleaning up. I probably needs an expert's review, although that's for someone else to do. Bearian 12:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)