User talk:Annaclear

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dispute resolution[edit]

It seems you have an editor that has a history of irking people. You may have to follow the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process. I think the next step in your case is to add your edits again, with an edit summary to discuss changes on the talk pages of each article before any further reverts. --Canoe1967 (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

References[edit]

Medical articles on Wikipedia must be cited by the best available evidence and written in a consistent format. We typically use review articles. A list of resources to help edit such articles can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN, additionally, the Citation Template Generator will aid in the formatting of references; all one needs to do is cut and paste the results. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note.

BTW, the above advice would lead to edit warring, which is frowned upon. When your changes are reverted, it is better to discuss on the talk page first (per WP:BRD), rather than edit warring. Yobol (talk) 19:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC) ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Not according to: Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. It depends how bold you wish to be.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

According to WP:BRD, you take it to the talk page after it's been reverted once. Being bold is the first addition. Adding the same material again, after it is reverted, is the start of edit warring. Yobol (talk) 20:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't really care how other editors want to squabble over edits. I just thought I would try to help a new editor improve wp, rather than just revert their edits without valid reason or ignoring their questions about the edits.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:47, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
If you want to help, you should probably ask new editors to follow proper procedure rather than edit war. (BTW, the edit summaries for the reverted contained links to the relevant policies and guidelines, and were certainly not reverted "without valid reason"). Yobol (talk) 21:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I have read some of your reverts. You have reverted some that had valid references and not responded when asked why. So:Wikipedia:Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I reverted additions that failed our guidelines, and are therefore, by definition, not "valid". I was at no point "asked" by this editor to explain why, as should amply be clear to anyone who had bothered to review their contributions as well as a review of the relevant talk pages and my user page. As it appears your edits towards me are headed the wrong way, I'll wait for this editor to start a relevant discussion on the appropriate article talk page rather than continue this pointless thread. Cheers. Yobol (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone, who contributed to this thread. I am still unclear as to the best way for me to move forward -- put the information back in, along with a note explaining why the sources I use are credible? Thanks again for your help, everyone. - Anna

The appropriate next step would be to start a new thread on one of the talk pages of the article, (or the the talk page for the Medicine Wikiproject) to get further input and to start a discussion when someone has reverted your addition. Yobol (talk) 16:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo
Hello! Annaclear, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)