User talk:Cqcosner

Welcome

Hello Cqcosner and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Ukexpat and I would like to thank you for your contributions.

Getting Started First steps • FAQ • Article creation wizard Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Community Portal • Help desk • Village Pump Where to ask questions or make comments • Request administrator attention Wikipedia: The Missing Manual Place {{helpme}} on your talk page and a small message explaining the problem The Commmunity Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists		Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Click here to reply to this message.

ukexpat (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a misunderstanding on your part about how we operate

In response to your query at User talk:Droll: there is no "administrator" of any particular article, and there are no "administrative rights". I could edit the article on your park, just as you could (although in your case, it would be discouraged, because of your obvious conflict of interest); so could some schoolgirl in Tananarive. Every one of the 3.5 million articles in the English-language Wikipedia, as well as the millions on other Wikipedias (German-language, Esperanto, Malayalam, etc.), can be edited by anybody: that's our model of operation. We sometimes, in particular cases, may restrict edits by new and anonymous users; or, in extreme cases, by anybody but adminstrators: but such cases are very rare.

If you have further questions and concerns, please reply here, so that we may have a clear and coherent discussion with anybody who wishes to add to, correct or clarify what I've said. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there's a really serious vandalism protection, we don't grant protection; the very strong default here is non-protected. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon Caves National Monument

I am responding to your request at User:Droll's talk page. I am afraid that we cannot transition administrative rights of the current Oregon Caves National Monument page over to the NPS. One of the cornerstones of Wikipedia is that it is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit so no one owns an article on Wikipedia nor do we allow one user or group of users sole editing rights to an article or group of articles. Because of your conflict of interest you are requested not to edit the article yourself. However, you can suggest changes to the article using its talk page, providing references to reliable sources to support your requested changes. Other users will review your request and either make the changes or discuss them with you. One final point for now about your user account. For licensing reasons user accounts must not be shared by more than one user, so please ensure that only you use this account. Hope this helps. I will watch this page for replies, so if you need any further assistance please ask here. – ukexpat (talk) 18:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the interests of education, would it be possible to allow this user to copy the article into a userspace draft and make edits there? Otherwise, the best thing to do would be to create your own Wiki. Ryan Vesey (talk) 19:52, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem with that provided they seek feedback on the draft first before copying into mainspace. I have created User:Cqcosner/Sandbox accordingly. – ukexpat (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your message on my talk page. Suggest we keep the discussion on this page. Please read WP:COI again. You do not have to have a promotional intent to have a COI. The fact that you intend to edit this article automatically puts you in a conflict. And please note carefully my comments above about shared accounts (you refer to yourself as "we"). – ukexpat (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A note of friendship

Everyone agrees that there are improvements that can be made to the OCNM wikipedia page. (very few pages are ever truly finished.) However with the rules on Conflict of Interest, it works better if someone with your high level of knowledge puts on the talk page for the article all of the things that can be corrected and improved with where they can be referenced (the website at the NPS is good as a reference as well as many other published places). There are some elements to making the page the best it can be that have somewhat of a learning curve as well. I'm looking forward to what can be done to improve the article!Naraht (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about a private wiki?

In your initial post you say you want to employ Wikipedia in your education program. Does that mean you want to convert the Oregon Caves National Monument page into something other than an encyclopedia article? If so, or if you really feel that your purpose cannot tolerate occasion vandalism, usually reverted in a few minutes if not seconds, then Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for your purpose. If you create a private wiki on your own site, you can have put anything you want in it, and you can have as much control as you want over it. If you wish, you could reuse or adapt content from the Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

If you would like to assess the vandalism rate and reversion response for the article, see the article history. You can recognize vandalism reversion in the history by words like “vandalism” or “unconstructive” in the edit summary. With such low rates there is no way the article would be subjected to even minimal protection. —teb728 t c 06:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Oregon

Let me chime in here and say that WikiProject Oregon has an active group of excellent editors who will gladly help maintain and improve the Oregon Caves article. Feel free to drop a note on the project's talk page anytime you need help--usually someone will answer you quite quickly. Valfontis (talk) 00:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]