User talk:Peter Kemball

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


Hello, Peter Kemball, and welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. -- Jeandré, 2007-12-08t15:31z

Rewrite of Angel capital[edit]

Hi Peter,

Many thanks for your recent rewrite of angel capital. The huge amount of additional detail which you've added provides a much better basis for a feature-class article. I've edited it a bit to conform more closely to Wikipedia's Manual of Style; there's still quite a bit of work required to make it fully conformant with Wikipedia's guidelines for article presentation, but this can be worked on gradually. Again, thanks for your contribution! Chris Cunningham (talk) 17:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Peter,

Peter, as Chris Cunningham has said, thanks for your work on the angel capital article. It clearly represents quite a bit of effort and research on your part, and it's this kind of dedication that makes Wikipedia so useful. That said, it's important to understand how Wikipedia works, and why it has become such a definitive source of information over the past several years. The fact is that the original article you were editing, Angel investor, got to where it is because of literally hundreds of small edits from dozens of people over several years. Many of the regular editors of that article are serious, well-known experts in the field, including some of the most active angel investors in the world, the leaders of well-known angel investing groups, and serial entrepreneurs and academics who are immersed in the space. It is certainly true, as you noted, that the article is far from perfect. However, it is actually quite accurate, gives a solid (if basic) grounding in the subject to new readers unfamiliar with the area, and is the result of a continuous process of 'crowd sourcing' over a long period of time. While much of the material you've added is really great, and provides a lot of detail that will make for a great Wikipedia article, I'm afraid that it was a bit too much, too soon. As a result, the consensus from the regular editors of the article (who, as I've mentioned, are intimately familiar with the subject and have been carefully working on this for years) is that while we're happy to have your Angel Capital article here, we have restored the original article back under its original title. Since you've taken the initiative to do all this great work, however, we will now take on the task of gradually, as time permits (but hopefully over the next few weeks), bringing much of your content into the original article, with appropriate editing, corrections, citations, and Wikipedia style. Doing it in small chunks will give everyone the opportunity to comment on, re-edit, or even revert, each edit, and thus leverage the 'wisdom of crowds' to make this a truly feature-class article. So, there's no need for you to do anything at this point (although you're welcome to watch as the original article is greatly improved thanks to your work.) But we just wanted you to know why the original article had re-appeared, and what would be happening. Thanks again for the hard work. The rest of Wikipedia could use that kind of dedication as well! Yorker (talk) 07:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)