User talk:John Foster: Difference between revisions
imported>John Foster (cleanup) |
imported>D. Matt Innis (Add archive box to archive your old talk pages) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{archive box|auto=long}} | |||
==The CZ approach== | ==The CZ approach== | ||
John, welcome to CZ! I just made some changes (and comments on the Talk page) for [[Social movement]]. Just a couple of things to suggest, as this is not WP and the CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately. First, it's better not to delete stuff unless you're really clear that it's wrong or irrelevant. This is not because we want to get stupidly long articles like WP, but we do need to consider alternative views and theories. Second, if you do decide to delete stuff, better to explain it on the Talk page. If you want to delete large amounts of stuff, discuss it first (if anyone is around to talk about it). And third, some articles are rather conceptual and theoretically based (like social movement), really requiring a lot of input and some expert oversight. This type of article is a tough nut to crack. Don't be afraid to start them, but equally don't be shocked if people argue, radically change or (as editors) occasionally over-rule you. We try to interfere politely though :-) Thanks, [[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 01:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC) | John, welcome to CZ! I just made some changes (and comments on the Talk page) for [[Social movement]]. Just a couple of things to suggest, as this is not WP and the CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately. First, it's better not to delete stuff unless you're really clear that it's wrong or irrelevant. This is not because we want to get stupidly long articles like WP, but we do need to consider alternative views and theories. Second, if you do decide to delete stuff, better to explain it on the Talk page. If you want to delete large amounts of stuff, discuss it first (if anyone is around to talk about it). And third, some articles are rather conceptual and theoretically based (like social movement), really requiring a lot of input and some expert oversight. This type of article is a tough nut to crack. Don't be afraid to start them, but equally don't be shocked if people argue, radically change or (as editors) occasionally over-rule you. We try to interfere politely though :-) Thanks, [[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 01:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Thanks, Martin. I certainly take your point that the "CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately". I've been doing what I consider to be some fairly straightforward editing, but have found that it has generated an incredible amount of Talk page discussion. As you say, everyone is being very polite, but I have been slightly overwhelmed and a bit discouraged at times, and am more reluctant to "be bold" now. [[User:John Foster|John Foster]] 20:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC) | :Thanks, Martin. I certainly take your point that the "CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately". I've been doing what I consider to be some fairly straightforward editing, but have found that it has generated an incredible amount of Talk page discussion. As you say, everyone is being very polite, but I have been slightly overwhelmed and a bit discouraged at times, and am more reluctant to "be bold" now. [[User:John Foster|John Foster]] 20:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:25, 16 May 2010
The CZ approach
John, welcome to CZ! I just made some changes (and comments on the Talk page) for Social movement. Just a couple of things to suggest, as this is not WP and the CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately. First, it's better not to delete stuff unless you're really clear that it's wrong or irrelevant. This is not because we want to get stupidly long articles like WP, but we do need to consider alternative views and theories. Second, if you do decide to delete stuff, better to explain it on the Talk page. If you want to delete large amounts of stuff, discuss it first (if anyone is around to talk about it). And third, some articles are rather conceptual and theoretically based (like social movement), really requiring a lot of input and some expert oversight. This type of article is a tough nut to crack. Don't be afraid to start them, but equally don't be shocked if people argue, radically change or (as editors) occasionally over-rule you. We try to interfere politely though :-) Thanks, Martin Baldwin-Edwards 01:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Martin. I certainly take your point that the "CZ approach is not so easy to grasp immediately". I've been doing what I consider to be some fairly straightforward editing, but have found that it has generated an incredible amount of Talk page discussion. As you say, everyone is being very polite, but I have been slightly overwhelmed and a bit discouraged at times, and am more reluctant to "be bold" now. John Foster 20:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)