User talk:Mark Matthew Dalton

Notes to myself: 1. It states on the EC page that "morning after pill" is a misnomer. 2. Antibiotic doesn't mean antibacterial anymore. Rather it means antibacterial and/or antifungal at least according to the antibacterial page. 3. "The main misconception was that the program involved coercive breeding." from the Lebensborn page.

Why are you deleting whole sections out of Creativity ?

Can you please explain why you deleted two whole sections out of the Creativity article?

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 08:11, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given much of the material was sourced, this is extremely problematic. Minimally, you should move the sections to the talk page so others can review the sources. Ideally one should have an explanation why each source is being removed if it is not reincorporated. --Ronz (talk) 17:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Ronz, it would have been good idea to move the sections to the talk page. I didn't know about that technique. Thank you for educating me. And, indeed it would have been a good idea to provide an explanation. I was in a rush, and I guess I hoped someone else would explain why I'd done it. It seems I was wrong about that.Mark Matthew Dalton (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the sections because I thought they were boring, because they contained little actual information about creativity, and were mainly about research people did in order to have done research, ie academic waffle. I thought that was obvious and had concluded that probably the article had been forgotten about. I thought the article would be better without the sections I deleted, among many other similarly boring sections in that bloated article. Some sections were extremely interesting, and access to them was being hindered, imho, by the boring sections. I read the article out of interest in the subject. I am a very active creative thinker. The sections I deleted seemed really to be useless fat better trimmed off.Mark Matthew Dalton (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm Lova Falk. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Creativity without thoroughly explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Lova Falk talk 19:27, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it was a mistake to neglect to explain fully why I'd deleted the sections. On the other hand, I think it was a mistake to restore the sections that I deleted. You might have placed them in the talk section for debate. Just a thought.Mark Matthew Dalton (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]