User talk:DpEpsilon

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DpEpsilon.

Questions regarding edits to Steve Dickson

Greetings Thanks for taking the time to write - I’m all for making wikipedia the best it can possibly be, so I appreciate your feedback.

Firatly though; I’m relatively new to editing wikipedia entries, so I’m not sure that this is the best way to reply to your message. If there is a better way, please let me know.

You referred to the fact that my edits of the ‘Steve Dickson’ page doesn’t follow wikipedia’s Manual of Style. I’m happy to learn about that, but a glance at the MOS page looks hugely detailed amd overwhelming. I’m not sure exactly which of those many many parameters you had in mind when you say I should pay more attention to the MOS. I would really appreciate you being more specific, or even updating the page in question itself so I can see from example what you mean.

Or perhaps you mean I’ve fallen prey to ‘recentism’...

“Recentism is a phenomenon on Wikipedia where an article has an inflated or imbalanced focus on recent events. It is writing without an aim toward a long-term, historical view. This can result in, among others: ▪ Articles overburdened with documenting controversy as it happens.”

In that case, I see what you mean. Does that mean the whole thing should be reduced to a short synopsis of the event, with links to further material, rather than verbatim quotes and so on?

As for ‘using straight quotation marks in articles,’ on my machine, at least, that’s how the quotation marks appear; perhaps I’m missing something?

Thanks again, conspiracyofjoy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conspiracyofjoy (talk • contribs) 11:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Conspiracyofjoy: Hi, thanks for your questions. Sorry I could not get back to you earlier.

The best way to reply to messages on your talk page is to continue them on your talk page and use the Reply To template, though this is fine as well.

I agree the manual of style is quite an intimidating document. I don't know it off by heart, nor do I think many people do, but I've developed a rough sense of what Wikipedia articles are supposed to look like over time, so if I think something looks off I check with the manual. It might take some time to get used to it, so don't be discouraged! If you're unsure about something specific, you can try searching through Wikipedia policy, or type {{help me}} on your talk page with any questions and someone will show up to answer them.

There are many experienced editors are happy to help newer editors, so even if your changes aren't perfect, don't worry about aspects of style you don't know about or have a good feel for. If it's a page which receives even a moderate amount of views, someone will fix your changes, and hopefully provide some guidance. If someone corrects your changes and write any messages on your talk page, feel free to clarify why they made changes on their talk page. I'm not so experienced myself, and I do make mistakes which I've had to ask the editors who came to correct changes about.

I do think your edits did fall prey to recentism in the way you described: There should be more summary, less dialogue and fewer quotes. I noticed some of the quotes you listed came from the video included with the source rather than the body of the article. A good guideline here is to only include some key quotes included in the text of cited sources, rather than listing many quotes from the included footage (which because it's a primary source, generally should not be relied upon anyway). Additionally, quotes should generally not be censored unless they are censored in the source they are taken from.

With regards to the curly/straight quotes, which web browser are you using? I believe some browsers insert curly quotes by default. Internet Explorer and Edge may do this, and so will some applications like Microsoft Word if you copy text from it to Wikipedia's editor.

Thanks again for your contributions, and thank you for willingness to accept feedback and ask questions! DpEpsilon ( talk | contribs ) 05:27, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Much Appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conspiracyofjoy (talk • contribs) 08:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, DpEpsilon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 04:51, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]