User talk:Peregrip

Your submission at Articles for creation

Peter Wanderfalke, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Cerebellum (talk) 20:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Drop by the Teahouse anytime for a cup of tea, or some help with editing!

Hello! Peregrip, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 20:56, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you using 2 accounts?

Is this also you User:Kingh81? You two seem to be editing connected articles, first one edits, then the other. If so, you need to pick one and stick with it, we have pretty strict rules on when alternate accounts are acceptable, please see WP:Multiple Accounts and WP:Sockpuppets. Cheers, He iro 21:57, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is that you Peter?

Hey, are you Peter? This is Horse. Kingh81 (talk) 13:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, noticed this edit here and thought I'd apprise you of a few of our policies here just as a heads up, you might want to take the time to read them just so you know the lay of the land here.

I also want to welcome you to Wikipedia, it is nice to have actual academics to help with these subjects. If you don't mind, I'm going to add a list template to your user page with links to guidelines, policies, explanations, etc. that I find helpful to navigate around here, feel free to remove it if you want. If you have any questions, please drop me a line either here or at my talkpage here User talk:Heironymous Rowe. Cheers, He iro 17:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per these messages at my talk, look to the top of this page to the left, you'll notice 2 tabs. One is your user talkpage (which we are on now) and the other is your user page. Userpages are for putting information about yourself if you wish, navigation templates such as I left there for you, etc(this is where I left the templates, you can see mine as an example by clicking the dark blue "He" in my signature). Talkpages are so other users can communicate with you, as we are doing here. Both are explained here WP:Userpages. You can also create other user subpages to use as temporary workspaces for articles in progress, where you can gather your sources, work out citations, etc. before going fully live with an article. You do this by creating a page such as "User:Peregrip/insert specific name of page here". Here is a sample page of one I use for various references, and citations templates : User:Heironymous Rowe/Useful books and their citations. As for the WP:COI, it is not strictly forbidden, just discouraged. As long as all information is presented in a WP:NPOV(neutral point of view), sourced to WP:RELIABLE WP:SECONDARY sources and follows our guidelines on Wikipedia:Biography of living person if alive, it can be ok. For an article about you personally, except for minor corrections, it is better to leave suggestions or start dialogues on the article talkpage (located in similar position to your usertalkpage(as mentioned above) on every article). Hope this helps. He iro 20:08, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, most people like to keep conversations together instead of bouncing back and forth between their respective talkpages, so can we keep this one here? I have this page watchlisted and will reply to future posts you make here, unless you want to start new conversations on other subjects, then it is always fine to leave me amessage at my talk. As for watchlisting, if you look to the top right of this page you notice a small bar with 5 or six tabs, one of them being a "star". All pages have these, if you click the star on pages, it turns solid blue and is added to your watchlist(which can be accessed inthe other tool bar right above it), so you can track when articles you have watchlisted have been edited by other users. Cheers, and hope this all helps. He iro 20:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I gotta say that this is a really weird encyclopedia. I've edited an encyclopedia and written a bunch of entries for others, and what usually happens is that you identify the person who knows the subject best and ask them to write about it with the best sources possible, especially primary sources from their own research. This encyclopedia seems to discourage that, and rather wants people who know little about a subject to write on it using purely secondary and tertiary resources. Doesn't really may sense to me. But then it's not my project. Peregrip (talk) 22:08, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that this is a purely volunteer project, with many editors, it is how we control quality and accuracy. We try to stick to secondary and tertiary sources because letting people use their own WP:Original research leads to articles about UFOs, Jedi particle physics, and totally unqualified people writing nonsense articles. All material should be cited to sources that can be checked and verified by any other user, it's our version of quality control. The same with the CoI and notability guidelines, it keeps people from removing pertinent information about themselves that they disagree with, adding unverifiable information or advertisements/boosterisms, creating an article about their brothers unknown garage band or their cat Smuggy or this great idea about time travel they had one day while smoking funny cigarettes, pushing political agendas or their own personal slant on any given subject. I think a little more leeway is given to actual experts and academics in this regard, examples would be many of our mathematics articles which are heavily edited by experts in their respective fields. I hope this doesn't scare you off from the project, we need and want experts in their fields to contribute to a better encyclopedia. And I hope I didn't creep you out too much by dropping in, I just wanted to let you know about a few of our policies here. Cheers, He iro 22:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter Wanderfalke for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter Wanderfalke is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Wanderfalke until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jinkinson talk to me 19:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]