User talk:OrangeStaple

Welcome[edit]

Hello OrangeStaple, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want tostay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at theNew contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of Contents

Department directory

Need help?

Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Dougweller Good luck, and have fun. --dougweller (talk) 18:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A fresh start?[edit]

OrangeStaple, another longtime Wikipedia editor has pointed out that we have not given you a very good welcoming to the Wikipedia community, or given you good guidance in how to approach a contentious situation. He's right, and you have my apologies. Please allow me to give it another shot.

I've started by archiving the past messages you've received from myself and others, which were largely redundant, and probably a bit insulting. You can find them here, or in the page history of this talk page.

With regard to the Howie Rich article:

First, I'd like to acknowledge your concern that it has been biased against him, and included less-than-reliable sources, in the past. I personally am not fond of Mr. Rich's approach to politics, and may have shared in contributing to that bias. But Wikipedia does have clear policies about what constitutes a reliable source, how to approach a biography of a living person, and maintaining a neutral point of view. I have tried to keep the article in compliance with all those policies, by removing content that isn't appropriate, and finding better sources where people have cited blogs etc., and I will continue to do so.

However, it is very important when making major edits to an article to avoid removing good content along with bad content. Please exercise particular care when dealing with material that is cited to well-established and respected news organizations, which Wikipedia editors generally regard as reliable sources.

I am pleased to see that you began using the edit summary field, to give some sense of what you were doing, and what was motivating your edits. When dealing with significant changes to an article, it is also important to discuss on the article's "talk page" or "discussion page" -- in this case, Talk:Howard Rich. Just put a comment at the bottom of the page, explaining what problem you see with the article, and how you want to address it; and watch for other people's responses. Truth be told, it's not the most intuitive software for having a discussion, but it's what we've got. If you have trouble with the technicalities, feel free to leave a note on my own talk page, or just email me, and I'll try to help.

At any rate -- I believe you and I disagree on the value of Howard Rich's political activities, but I look forward to working with you in a way that improves the balance of the article, and serves readers looking to learn more about him well. -Pete (talk) 22:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Although you were blocked for editing Wikipedia for a few hours, it's still possible for you to edit this page. Feel free to respond here; if you wish to be unblocked, just say so, and I'm happy to take care of it myself. The block may have been overly harsh, and if so, I'm sorry for my role in making it happen.

Warnings[edit]

I am truly sorry about those warnings earlier today, I misread the diffs that Huggle was reporting to me. Here's hoping you continue editing and enjoy your time here - don't let fools with poor eyesight like myself get in your way. Welcome! :) — neuro^(talk) 22:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked[edit]

Unblocked now. dougweller (talk) 22:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Howard Rich[edit]

Hi!

I see that you're making some pretty substantial edits to Howard Rich. Since there was some conflict over some very similar edits about a week ago, it would be very helpful if you would make an effort to discuss those changes on the article's talk page. (You can find the talk page of any article by clicking on the discussion tab at the top of the article page, or go directly there by following this link: Talk:Howard Rich.)

Open discussion and consensus-building are an important and expected part of collaborative article writing. I strongly encourage you to open up a conversation on the talk page before making further major edits. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I also please remind you to always use edit summaries and always log in, I noticed that your last 2 edits were done while you were not logged in. dougweller (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]