User talk:David Boven
Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute boldly and well. Here are pointers for a quick start. You'll probably want to know how to get started as an author. Just look at Getting Started for other helpful "startup" links, our help system and CZ:Home for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via Twitter. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forum is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any administrator for help, too. Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! --Larry Sanger 19:18, 18 June 2008 (CDT)
David--we're glad to have you on board but please do not rename articles written by other people (eg Lepanto) without a discussion on the talk page first. The goal is to have a uniform style throughout CZ and that requires a basic policy as set by the military editors. In general "Battle of XYZ" emphasizes the generic (battles in general) while "XYZ, battle of" emphasizes the specific historic event XYZ. CZ has lively discussions on naming policies, so listen in and contribute there.Richard Jensen 08:27, 16 May 2008 (CDT)
- Be bold-please write! it's just that moving and renaming articles causes no end of technical troubles, and I've made the mistake several times. Happily our very good technical crew cleaned up the mess I made. :) As for Chicago, back in the 1970s I started the Chicago Metro History Fair and ran it for a few years...it seems to be going strong still. Good luck with those city schools. Right now I am working with very poor rural districts around the country, in Byrd Teaching American History projects. Richard Jensen 10:30, 16 May 2008 (CDT)
Heraldry and tartan patterns (kilt article)
Right you are! Thanks for the catch. James F. Perry 16:15, 16 May 2008 (CDT)
Knights Templar Article
I just wanted to give you and Geoff a brief heads-up that reverting each others' edits on the Knights Templar article is emphatically not the way we do things on Citizendium. If you two are in disagreement about what should go in the main Knights Templar article and what shouldn't, you need to hash this out on the Talk page. Unexplained reverts are disrespectful, but also a potentially bannable offense.
Thanks, Brian P. Long 15:29, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
- Thanks for the note, David. I hope I didn't come off as overly harsh; I was mainly trying to be helpful. I know we have a heap of policy pages and uncodified practices that are unfamiliar if you haven't been here a while (I find or rediscover policy recommendations on what seems like a daily basis). At any rate, I saw the discussion on Geoff's talk page after I had posted the note.
- The usual (and recommended) practice is to come to some kind of consensus on the article's talk page. If two contributors find that they are unable to come to a consensus, there is a mechanism where a third party can be brought in to resolve the disagreement. The important thing is to keep the discussion civil and professional, and focused on the task at hand. Negotiating on the wording or content of an article can be contentious, but reverts have a tendency to make the process even more acrimonious. It sounds like you know how these things go. Have a nice weekend as well. Thanks, Brian P. Long 20:31, 24 May 2008 (CDT)
article for possible approval
Hi, David, I just realized that you are a Sports editor -- I didn't think any of them were active at all. Glad to see that you're here and doing stuff! Could you take a look at the Ray Casey article and tell me if you think it needs anything more? Frankly, I think it's gone about as far as it can except for more research concerning long-ago matches, which is pretty difficult to do. And, of course, if possible, I'd sure like to see it get Approved status if this is within your means -- I don't think that there are any Approved sports articles at all.... Thanks, and all the best, Hayford Peirce 19:37, 30 May 2008 (CDT)