User talk:Chip123456/Archive 13
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 20 |
Barnham Page
Hi Chip...
Thanks for your message.
As you can see, I have got a bit wound up about this-the situation regarding the villages has caused the stress and tension that has been reflected in my exchanges and I have not intended to be rude or discourteous to the other posters, notably Charles, and I apologise.
Thankyou for offering to 'mentor' me-which is all I wanted, I will cease altering the page back now.
The development that is happening in the village is a very real concern and hugely relevant. I needed to raise it on the page as it is just that. I also provided two sources, see the notes for the URL's.
I was concerned that one of the reasons my insertions was rated as "opinion" is that at least one other thar remains in-situ, about the cattle market, could be regarded in exactly the same way. Rightly or wrongly, this attitude towards contributors such as myself perpetuates the belief that Wikipedia is elitist-with this issue re.Barnham, your attitude is spot on, "...I've removed it, this is why, have a word if you want guidance..."-if only that had been the case earlier...
So how do we include this information so that it is relevant and "acceptable"?
I'm happy for the information given to be edited as per the Wikipedia style but do think it has to be included. Many thanks.
86.27.17.38 (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC) Ed 12/8/12
- I would class 'relevant' and 'acceptable' additions as edits which a strongly backed by secondary, reliable sources. --Chip123456 11:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- As well as sourcing there are other policies and guidelines to consider such as Recentism, neutral point of view, due weight in the context of a thousand year history and the fact that Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Every village has planning applications and I do not believe they are worth including until development is approved. Somebody with a conflict of interest and highly charged feelings on the matter is not the best person to write on such matters anyway. Thank you for sorting this out Chip and I am pleased to see what a constructive editor you are becoming.--Charles (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for the last comment, Charles. 86.27.17.38, please note that the page has no been semi protected, meaning you are unable to edit. During this time if you find any information, then present it in a neutral point of view, with the secondary, reliable sources as well as whether if you feel it is relevant or not, please nudge somebody on the article talk page. If that fails, come and poke Charles or myself.--Chip123456 07:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Userboxen
Hi Chip, there are two ways of looking at userboxen. On is for bragging about what one has done, and what one would like to be, and the other is to inform people of where they might get some help and who might be most qualified to provide it. Without the need for hierarchies and bureaucracies, I drive the WP:WPSCH quite hard, but far from telling people what they must do there and organising votes for staff on it or IRC chats, I just carry out the tasks listed in the Coordinator box, watch for vandalism on the special school article watchlist, clean up 100s of poorly written school articles, and get others to GA. The visible uboxen on my userpage are there to inform and let people know where they can get help. The rest, for anyone who is really interested, are tucked discretely away, and the fact that I pioneered the reduction of irrelevant comments on RfAs is not even mentioned, but I like to think it has worked ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi! I have no problem with the UB, in fact, it helped me and the others find out you were a coord for the project. I was just asking about leadership etc. Anyway, hope alls ok and your internet is working again after the fire :)Chip123456 13:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Re leadership: Looks like I opened a can of 'worms' at the CVU. I'm glad he has taken the lead and I hope the CVU members will take his sound advice and suggestions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I saw that earlier. He has some good ideas.--Chip123456 11:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- Re leadership: Looks like I opened a can of 'worms' at the CVU. I'm glad he has taken the lead and I hope the CVU members will take his sound advice and suggestions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)