User talk:Aapelle

Welcome!

Hello, Aapelle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Cirt (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial topic area alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 07:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

November 2020

Hi Aapelle! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Ad Fontes Media that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 07:10, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Newslinger. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Ad Fontes Media seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 07:13, 3 November 2020 (UTC) Edited to lower warning level. — Newslinger talk 01:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Newslinger. Totally a mistake to mark my edit as minor. My change did not contain any commentary or personal analysis. I shortened it to correct for a non-neutrality in the sentence. I re-edited your reverted text to keep the specificity. Here the change should be unambiguously better as it is both more specific and more accurate. The previous wording was misleading. It made it seem the whole journal--by using "Columbia Journal" as the grammatical subject--was speaking with one voice--which was not the case--rather than 1 journalist writing in the journal.

It's a very high-quality reference, and the content appears to already be overqualified. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hipal/Ronz. It is a high quality reference. However, the text states "the Columbia Journalism Review questioned". This is not accurate. The *journal as whole* did not say anything as an *entity*. It *published* an opinion article by Tamar Wilner. It was not a statement on behalf of the organization as a whole. It would be more accurate to say that Tamar Wilner "questioned" rather than the journal "questioned". The previous wording gives the statement the misleading authority of the whole organization.Aapelle (talk) 18:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We're discussing this at the article talk page, so I don't want to continue here. I don't see how it's an opinion. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 17:17, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk), whether it was an opinion piece specifically is not material...the byline of the article is NOT the Columbia Journalism Review. The byline of the article is Tamar Wilner. Thus it is accurate to state "Tamar Wilner questioned" rather than "Columbia Journalism Review (the organization) questioned". The latter is not accurate as they are the publisher of the article, not the author.Aapelle (talk) 18:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aapelle, will you PLEASE sign your talk page posts, here and elsewhere? Drmies (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

wil do, thank youAapelle (talk) 17:59, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit-warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ad Fontes Media; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you appear to find my change an improvement, I'm not going to remove it at this time. I'm happy to do so if it will help us all focus more on the discussion. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A bit on refactoring your own comments

Hi Aapelle. Thank you for continuing to refactor your comments. I often do something similar: write a quick comment, and then go back and try to make it more personable. I think I pointed out WP:REFACTOR to you. Did I forget WP:REDACT? One tip: If no one has yet responded to your own comment, feel free to rewrite it if little or no time has passed. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]