User talk:WizardGamer775/Archive 1

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.

Hi W. F. Irving! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Jacona (talk) 19:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Nice to meet you. W. F. Irving (talk) 19:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

• I think some of the messages above have been written in ways which are unlikely to help you to understand what the issues are which editors have been concerned about. In particular it doesn't seem to me that "vandalize" is the right word to use, because it looks to me as though you are editing in good faith. However, there are concerns, and I shall try to help clarify what some of them are. Like most of us when we start editing Wikipedia, you have mistakenly done a number of things which are not in line with Wikipedia practices.
• Content of a Wikipedia article should be supported by references to reliable sources for verifiability; the mere fact that someone who has chosen to create a Wikipedia account says something is not enough, because anyone can come along and post anything, true or false. You can read more about providing suitable references in the guidelines Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In my opinion Wikipedia has far too many policies and guidelines, and most of them are far too long and complex, making them confusing for new editors, so don't worry about reading and leaning every word of them, but have a look at them to get the general idea.
• Don't post your own opinions, assessments, analysis or commentary into articles. A Wikipedia article is not a medium for editors to promote their own points of view.
• I can understand what prompted you to write "Please refrain from being a hard-nosed gatekeeper" above, but try to avoid such comments. Making negative personal comments about editors (which is quite different from expressing disagreement with the editing they have done) is seen as at best uncivil, and at worst personal attacks, both of which are not considered acceptable. Also, on this occasion the message was from an experienced and reliable editor, who was trying to help you by clarifying what a talk page is for, which you had apparently not fully understood. Almost all of us, when we start editing Wikipedia, know little or nothing about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so nobody can be blamed for starting out doing things that are contrary to policies and guidelines that they don't know about. However, when more experienced editors offer information about those policies and guidelines, it is best to listen to them. Unfortunately, the fact that new editors are often confronted with very unhelpful messages, such as calling good faith but mistaken editing "tests", or worse still "vandalism", in both cases without any attempt to actually explain what is considered to be problematic about the editing, runs the risk of encouraging new editors to also view other, more constructive, messages in a negative light, but in this case General Ization's message was a perfectly constructive attempt to help you understand better what talk pages are for.
• I have written these comments in the hope that they may help to clarify things for you, after you have had what must be a discouraging start to editing Wikipedia. Please feel welcome to let me know if you think I may be able to give you further clarification or advice. JBW (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

*:Thanks JBW. To be honest I have lost interest in editing Wikipedia at all after this. W. F. Irving (talk) 01:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

• On second thought perhaps I'll give Wikipedia a second chance. W. F. Irving (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Angus Glen Community Centre is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angus Glen Community Centre until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Bulklana (talk) 18:20, 9 March 2024 (UTC)