User talk:SharonBennett

Hello, SharonBennett, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages 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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incremental changes, elegant variation, English variety

Hi, Sharon, and welcome. I ran across your change to Date rape, with the edit summary Prepositions, misplaced commas/periods with quotation marks, run-off sentence that needed to be shortened. Unfortunately, there were some improvements, mixed in with some problems, which I explained in the edit summary there where I reverted it. In that edit, you made numerous, small changes of wording for no apparent reason, just alterations of one word, for another that you might think is similar, but sometimes they're not supported by sources in the article, and sometimes there are legal distinctions (e.g., offense for crime) and in other cases, it just seemed like change, for the sake of change. In other cases, you seemed to make chnages from American spelling to British spelling, but please read our policies about that at WP:ENGVAR, including MOS:TIES, and MOS:RETAIN.

I noticed a similar sort of pattern at Video games as an art form, with a mix of some word changes which might be defensible, mixed in with others that are not an improvement to the article. I haven't reverted it, and might just edit it to fix a couple of issues.

You might want to consider making incremental changes in a string of small, consecutive edits, rather than ranging all over the article in one, comprehensive edit that contains a whole bunch of unrelated changes. That way, if another editor disagrees with some part of your change, they don't have to revert the whole thing. One other thing: please read about elegant variation; it's not necessary, for example, to change subsequenbt occurrence of crime to assault to offense to whatever else, just to avoid repeating the word crime. It's more important to use the word that best summarizes what the reliable source underlying that portion of article content is saying; and in changing from one word to another, you might not be representing the source in the best possible way.

Once again, welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope you like it around here, and decide to stay! Mathglot (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Problems at Coaching

Another editor has reverted this change of yours to Coaching. Many of the problems noted in the section above are also a problem here. Your edit contained:

problematic changes of English variety; do not change spelling to American-style, just to suit your preference, such as behaviour to behavior
invalid changes to Wikilinks (words or phrases contained [[inside square brackets]] which caused the links to break
apparently minor changes of wording that nevertheless change a factual statement to a false one, for example:
- BEFORE: The first use of the term in relation to sports came in 1861. (this is a true statement)
- AFTER: The first use of the term was concerning sports in 1861. (this is false; first use concerned vehicles, and was in 1550)
changes of correct grammar to incorrect, for example:
- BEFORE: coaching is a form of "meta-profession" that can apply to supporting clients in any human endeavor (correct)
- AFTER: coaching is a form of "meta-profession" that can apply to support clients in any human endeavor (Gerund is needed here, not the infinitive.)
questionable word changes that do not improve the article, such as helping clients to assisting clients or that change the meaning, for accurate self-awareness to for certain self-awareness

Please have a look at some of the links in the Welcome message above, and maybe have a look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Women in India

I reverted this edit of yours at Women in India. This was another edit with numerous fixes throughout the article, quite a few of which were improvements to the use of definite articles or prepositions; unfortunately, they were bundled with even more numerous problems.

The following words are all correctly spelled: Labour, defense, practise, organisation, offence, judgement, foetus, emphasises, sterlisation; please do not change them to American spelling, per MOS:TIES and MOS:RETAIN.
Do not change words inside a quotation, even if they look wrong to you, for example, changing "afar" to "far". There are situations where you can change very obvious typos with noting them, but this is not a case like that.
Do not change letters inside urls, not even to change lower case to upper case, such as /congress to /Congress because that will break the link.

A bunch of your changes were an improvement, and may be reapplied. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:32, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please slow down, and use the Show Preview button

As a brand new editor, you are welcome here, and it's normal to make mistakes; we all do, especially in the beginning when we are just starting out. However, it does appear to me like you may be attempting to make too many changes too rapidly, without really considering the effects of your edits before publishing them.

I had a look at Adoption in the United States, and once again, I have found numerous, small, careless errors. I don't doubt your good faith and your desire to improve the encyclopedia through your edits, but in fact, some of your edits are requiring other people to come in behind you, and fix up the problems. Problems of this sort can be minimized, by using the Show Preview and Show Changes buttons, before publishing your changes. Please, with all of your edit, use the Show Preview button, and the Show Changes button, to see if the changes that are about to be published, are the ones you really want to see published.

For example, I had to revert your recent edit to Adoption in the United States. There were several changes you made which altered correct grammar, to incorrect; for example:

BEFORE: agencies typically help find homes for waiting children
AFTER: agencies typically help find homes for waiting for children
BEFORE: To assist in the adoption of waiting children,
AFTER: To assist in the adoption of waiting for children,

There were numerous other changes from correct to incorrect, but I'm not going to list them all. These were, as before, mixed in with some beneficial changes, including use of hyphens, and other cases. If your changes had been broken down into several, incremental edits, it would perhaps not have been necessary to revert all of your changes.

Please slow down, and use the Show Preview button, and the Show Changes button, to check your changes before publication. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 11:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Women's empowerment

I reverted this edit of yours at Women's empowerment. Your edit summary alluded to singular vs plural, among other things. However in fact, your change broke subject/verb number agreement, and the revert restored it. For example:

BEFORE: Women's empowerment is the process in which women elaborate and recreate what it is that they can be...
AFTER: Women's empowerment is the process in which women elaborate and recreates what it is that they can be,... (women + recreate; no '-s')

or

BEFORE: Alternatively, it is the process for women to redefine gender roles that allows for them to acquire the ability to choose between known alternatives... Awkward, but correct: process allows..
AFTER: Alternatively, it is the process for women to redefine gender roles that allow them to acquire the ability... Awkward and incorrect; the verb 'allow' now seems to have 'gender roles' as a subject, but that's the last thing that gives them choice; rather, it's the abandonment or superseding of gender roles which provide choice.

There were some beneficial improvements that got lost with the revert; they could be reapplied. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 11:33, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Mean as custard (talk) 09:36, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hello! Please see the following link: Wikipedia:Help desk and ask the question about that specific editing format. If you need any help, just let me know. Red Director (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]