A Few Notes
Hi Miroj, I have been asked to take a look at some of your recent edits, comments, and discussions. I hope you don't mind if I make a few suggestions:
- sarcasm is one of my favourite tools, but be careful that it doesn't become uncivil
- like, whatever is something we need to say occasionally. Wikipedia is communal - it looks like a lot of people decided that an article you did a lot of work on was not valid on WP. In that case, sometimes it's good to think about how it all matters in the multiverse
- policy wonks Wikipedia is policy-driven. I see you have a really good "Welcome" at the top of this page that links to a lot of those policies. It is good to familiarize yourself with them to avoid frustration later. When there are problems, experienced editors might actually draw your attention to specific policies (such as WP:OWN)...that's always a good time to a minor reality check, and it's not always an "attack" by the other editor - we all should be helping each other.
- new comments go last on other people's Talk pages. You're welcome to edit your own talk page however you want (within reason) but new discussions go at the bottom, and be careful not to accidentally delete existing information from other people's pages - only they have the right to do so (within reason).
All in all, I believe that having passion for articles is a good thing, as it helps make better articles AND better editors. If you have any questions, problems, let me know.08:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Sometimes, the "community" does call for "sit down and shut up" to all of us - there are days we're a "hippie commune" and some days we're the "Borg Collective". Funny how community has the two extremes. Even Wikipedia, in the midst of its rules, has the WP:IAR rule. We're told to be "bold in our edits". It's weird at times, but I would rather point out ways to improve, rather than put a "you're bad" template some days. I was surprised someone used the Turing Test analogy, and was humoured by it. Unfortunately, I do agree that the article in question probably did not belong on Wikipedia ... in fact, it's the kind of information I would build a website for, put ads that generated me some $$$, and maybe even a $5/year membership to access the information. 11:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Improving Immunology Articles
Hi Miroj, I am simply an editor who thinks some of the immunology articles on Wikipedia are far from complete and the quality can be easily improved. I'd love to do it all by myself, but it'd be even better to do it in a team, to be more efficient as well as to get a wider viewpoints (from the medical, molecular and cellular viewpoints for example). If you are interested, please go to here and just start editing. The purpose of the page (it's a new page) is simply to get everyone together and collaborate, as to ensure there's editors for different topics. I look forward to working with you soon, any help would be greatly appreciated. 01:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)