Welcome!

Hello, Ibyrnison, 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:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair 03:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Hi - I looked at the diff you provided and I don't think the edit was in breach of the policy at Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Have a look at Examples that are not personal attacks for some clarification. At one stage Diana W suggests "get real" - I can see this is a little aggressive and she also personalises the debate a bit by using "you" but I assume she is attempting to respond to specific edits. Overall though she is trying to ask for sources and trying to point out why sources cited are in her view not credible. Although she is interspersing comments, she is doing so with indents - I have seen far far worse breaches of wikiquette:-) and I think she is trying to respond to comments close to where the comments are made. It is readable.

To escalate an issue, you may wish to use WP:PAIN. First you should warn the contributor - see Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace and remember to subst - ie the text would be {{subst:npa2}} or whatever. I recommend using a diff to clarify so it is absolutely clear what it is you are talking about. Check that your complaint falls within the scope of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. The rest of the instructions are on that noticeboard and somebody should come along and help. The advantage will be they are unlikely to know anything about the content dispute (like me) and will look at it objectively. None of us are here 24/7 but usually somebody is. Regards--Arktos ^talk 20:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is getting very long. Perhaps a project page or archive the talk page of any discussion older than 2 days ago. You need to work together, probably out of the article space to identify less than satisfactory references and whether they should stay or how they should be used. Try to understand where others are coming from. If necessary dividing up the article with sections giving the positions from the viewpoint of Waldorf "supporters" and "critics" is fine as a starting position. From there you may be able to work to a better article.--Arktos ^talk 20:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waldorf Project Update

Dear Ibyrnison, I am sending each project member a copy of the note I am sending to the adminsitrators about our project. I remain very optimistic that this project can make a big difference in the quality of the Waldorf page as experienced by the Wiki reader. I am pasting the letter below my signature and invite feedback on my Talk. Wonderactivist 04:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Longhair and Cormaggio, Thank you immeasurably for your help with the Waldorf project so far. As you will note below, I am planning shortly to move the project pages to within alt ed - just want to clarify structure first. It is currently at User:Wonderactivist/Waldorf Project Team Page

With your admin experience, and the amount of back-n-forth this article has undergone - actually speeding up since the proposed project - I would like your opinion on strategies to manage the project if you should have time.

I see two major issues:

1 there are "sides" within the group instead of a single focus on creating a good article. While this is somewhat to be expected, I also expected a greater level of professionalism. Is there a known strategy to begin to turn this around?

2 Unbelievably, I think,we have actually reached almost a consensus on the Introduction. I would like to focus on this positive and if possible have it become a springboard for examining just one section at a time. 3 On the current project page, a format for the article has been proposed, while the person actually rewrote the whole article, I propose taking just the OUTLINE - the section names 0- and beginnning with agreeing upon the sections.

Other than the administrative questions, my project strategy will be to set up two pages within the alt ed project:

1 to lay out a structure - outline only - for the page 2 to finalize with formal agreement, the introduction. 3 ONLY begin work on the next section when we have agreed upon the above two, then moving just one section at a time.

My hope is that it will disarm the ongoing wars over fine points and pet projects.

What is your opinion?

And thank you from the bottom of my transplanted Texas heart! Wonderactivist 04:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Proposal at Waldorf Project

With advice from an admin, I have taken the next step in the Waldorf project and invite your opinions or alternative suggestions for a first formal proposal. In the face of the ongoing conflict it will be necessary to work especially hard toward NPOV and to establish groundrules before we can begin our real editing work. I invite you to be part of that process at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Waldorf_Project_Proposals Wonderactivist 14:32, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Waldorf Project Team Members

I just wanted to let you know that two proposals have passed on the Waldorf project and two more - one based on Fergie's starting place - have been set out for discussion here. Feedback has been given that the project has been going slow. I apologize as I had hand surgery a week ago, but truly nothing should wait for one person. If we each check in once or twice a week, we should be able to get through the article in a month or two. I would appreciate your valuable insights on the proposals and timing. Wonderactivist 12:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waldorf Edits In clicking around to user pages to send the note, I have seen that the edit wars are truly still raging - they just have moved from the Waldrof page to user pages. As a result, I do not advise speeding up this project - time will be well-spent hashing out the disagreements civilly, with the result being a better page for Wikipedia and its readers. The problem with this page, overall, has been each person's need to push their own agenda without taking time to consider other viewpoints. Please do not resume your edit wars on the page. Wonderactivist 12:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Waldorf_Project"