Content deleted Content added
→Edit-warring: Reply |
QuillThrills (talk | contribs) New Message (simulated automatically as part of The Wikipedia Adventure) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 35:
:My edits on the page have been de novo, good faith, well-cited and well-reasoned edits, each linking to a specific issue I had with the previous version with specific wikipedia policy/guideline links and extensive discussions in the talk page about. The talk page is proof of this as is my edit history for any third party to consider. The nice thing about wikipedia is the transparency of all this. [[User:QuillThrills|QuillThrills]] ([[User talk:QuillThrills#top|talk]]) 06:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:QuillThrills|QuillThrills]]You are dealing with a very vile bad faith editor known for pov pushing. I provided my input but ill rather you dont engage with him anymore or they will distort more pages in frustration. Its a western platform afterall.Leave it [[User:DangalOh|DangalOh]] ([[User talk:DangalOh|talk]]) 08:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Thank you for contributing to the discussion I've brought up. I don't actually get frustrated by any of this and I continue to assume good faith until I'm proven wrong. It's incredible how much of his day [[User:Joshua Jonathan]] puts into Wikipedia - his dedication to the site is commendable. But any user including he can expect me to challenge issues where I see for example, inaccessible ideas being used in the lead (eg non-brahmanical in gita), original arguments being synthesized from multiple sources , undue weight being given to quotes by non experts representing fringe or biased views that carry weighted, contentious language within them.
:::End of the day, Wikipedia is improved by everyone's input. Editors, even experienced ones, are subject to the limits of human perspective-taking - the ability to take a step back and ask among other questions, "how would the average Wikipedia reader feel about this?" Minority viewpoints should be represented, contention should be represented, but the questions and level of details must remain within scope and the sources must be sound. [[User:QuillThrills|QuillThrills]] ([[User talk:QuillThrills#top|talk]]) 12:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Perhaps I was unduly harsh in my critique of Joshua. Ultimately, we are all merely human beings entangled in trivial disputes, striving to fulfill our own base desires. I wholeheartedly agree with your points and genuinely appreciate your patience—a commendable quality that I must admit I lack. Nonetheless, I still hold onto some hope that Joshua will become more friendly and understanding. I encourage you to continue engaging with him. I will refrain from further involvement due to my own shortcomings. regards, [[User:DangalOh|DangalOh]] ([[User talk:DangalOh|talk]]) 12:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::[[user:DangalOh]] I welcome you to engage wherever you find interest and wherever you see issues in editing including if it is an issue with some of my edits. Your viewpoint on the Gita and War discussion was indeed helpful - it helped affirm that others also agreed that instance of Rao's quote was an example of undue weight being given to an extreme minority nonexpert view. [[User:QuillThrills|QuillThrills]] ([[User talk:QuillThrills#top|talk]]) 13:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
==Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!==
[[File:TWA guide left bottom.png |left|link=]]
:::::'''Hi QuillThrills!''' We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
::::::* [[WP:TWA/Portal|The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page]]
::::::* [[WP:TWA/Lounge|The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge]]
::::::* [[WP:Teahouse|The Teahouse new editor help space]]
::::::* [[WP:Help|Wikipedia Help pages]]
{{Wikipedia:TWA/Navigation2}}
-- 15:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
| |||