User:Perfectblue97/Reach

re: Reach Out

Wikipedia policy and guidelines are a vast body, and damn complicated to boot. To make matters worse, there's a gaping divide between the theory behind the rules and the actual implementation of the rules itself. I'd be glad to help you out if you'd like, explaining things to the best of my understanding -- while I'm not the most prolific contributor, I'm a long-time member. Let me know which article you're talking about, and I'll let you know what I think.

Oh, and in general, there's also Request for Comment, which can get you feedback on the article in question.

Peace - CheNuevara 20:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for offering to help.

Things are getting out of hand on this one article. I don't want drag you into anything nasty, but I'm trying to build it up a specific page (Cattle mutilation) to wiki-code, and the other user involved is being very obstructive.

They are constantly deleting the changes that I make, but they refuse to add to the page themself, or to provide me with any constructive feedback that I can use to make sure that my future edits meet Wiki-standards.

They are also citing POV WP:RS, WP:V, Undue weight and incivility every few minutes, but they won't tell me what they are related to. I've asked several times, I've even asked them to stop deleting things and just tag the soecific paragraphs that they have issues with, but they just said no, they would just delete anything that they disagreed with. When they do tag, they tag rigth at the top of a section so I can't tell which bits don't meet the standards, or which parts of the standards they don't meet.

It's so unbelievably frustrating as I can't even use what they delete to learn what I shouldn't in the future as it is so obaque.

As things are so much has been deleted that the page is now a real mess and isn't fit for display.

If you or somebody could help out it would be appreciated.

perfectblue 08:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Perfect. Read your message at Reach Out. So sorry to hear it is getting you down and hope you will feel better soon. I had a quick look at cattle mutiliation and while I know nothing about the topic I could see that there was a one-to-one conflict that is not going anywhere at the moment. An RFC could be a good solution at this stage. It just means that you and the other user take a step back and get some other ideas in from people who have not edited the article yet. I have particular ideas about suitable sources for articles - drop me a message on my talk page if you want to know about them. Take care. Itsmejudith 16:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. My particular method would be to start with the sources. Have you (or the other editor) got access to a good range of sources to write the article? You can use one source to find others because a good source should have its own references or bibliography. Sort the list into categories in order of reliablity (WP:RS) : papers in scientific journals, newspaper articles, magazine articles, web reports, blogs and so on. Then put the list on the article talk page and ask for comments. Perhaps there is agreement that most of the sources are appropriate for the article and only disagreement about one or two. I also think that an RFC would be very appropriate for this article because it might help you and the other contributor to break out of the "Is! Isn't!" pattern. An RFC is not a punishment for a bad editor, it is a way of helping the encyclopedia along, which is everyone's aim at the end of the day. Get back to me if you want to discuss further. Itsmejudith 10:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I can see you've been busy on cattle mutilation. Are you feeling OK about it? I know you've put in a lot of work you don't want to see go to waste, while at the same time it's a topic that a lot of people have strong views about. Hope you can stay chilled and come back to Esperanza if you need to. Itsmejudith 23:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Still hope you're feeling positive about the way your work on cattle mutilation is going. Your reach-out request got more people involved in the article, but the main point is, do you feel more supported? Itsmejudith 21:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)