User talk:AnaSoc/Archive1

WP:Minor edits
Edits like this are not WP:Minor edits. They may seem like it, but they are not. Read WP:Minor for what I mean. Be careful not to mark edits as minor unless they are. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Clitoris article
Discuss changes on the article talk page. Do not keep making changes that are likely to be contested. If you do, not only will you continue to be reverted, this will go to WP:Dispute resolution. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Student?
Regarding this and this, are you a student editor? If so, you might benefit from reading WP:Student editing. Regarding what I stated above, discussing matters with established editors/others watching an article is important, especially on articles like the aforementioned one. I'm sure that Ryan (Wiki Ed), Sage (Wiki Ed), Ian (Wiki Ed) and/or Shalor (Wiki Ed) (a few of the editors who oversee student editing) can elaborate on why this is the case. I appreciate that you are now proposing material on the talk page first. Doing that and working on text together is better than having your content reverted and WP:Edit warring. Also see this discussion where Shalor and I engaged student editors. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . AnaSoc is not a student editor but one of the academics participating in Wikipedia Fellows. It's a 3-month pilot, running through the end of March. You've actually encountered another of the participants recently, too:, over at the adult article. The reason you're seeing some indicators of student editing (like the Dashboard-related diff you linked to above) is because for the pilot, we (Wiki Education) are using some of our existing infrastructure for this pilot (i.e. the tools/resources we use to support students). If/when we run the program again, I hope to make the distinction clearer on-wiki by further adapting those resources. If you want to chat more about the program, I'd welcome a message on my talk page. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 03:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Ryan (Wiki Ed), thanks for explaining. Whether AnaSoc is a student or scholar, my concern is getting AnaSoc to stop, listen and talk by engaging on the article's talk page, which she is now doing so far. I have this concern per what I stated above and on the article's talk page. Michaelramirez took the time to propose changes first, talk with me, and listen. Working with Michaelramirez was fine. I am hoping that working with AnaSoc will be fine. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , as Ryan (Wiki Ed) notes, I am not a student in the strict sense in that I am not taking classes. But I am a student in that I am a lifelong learner and I am eager to learn how to effectively work collaboratively to improve Wikipedia articles. It looks like you and I have similar interests in particular article topics, as I see your name on many of the talk pages I frequent. I asked for assistance today on the NOR noticeboard about this claim: "Sociological, sexological and medical debate have focused on the clitoris, primarily concerning anatomical accuracy, gender inequality, orgasmic factors and their physiological explanation for the G-spot." As I have said several times on the Clitoris talk page, I do not believe that this is a verifiable claim.AnaSoc (talk) 02:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Before you recently replied on the article's talk page, I was in the process of stating the following: "I have been working on sexological, anatomical, psychological, medical and gender Wikipedia articles since 2007. That's why you see me at these types of articles. It's my main editing focus, which is why editors sometimes turn to me for my help or opinion on these topics. I also edit other topics (such as film articles). As for the rest, WP:OR means material for which no reliable, published source exists. As shown on the article's talk page, there are clearly reliable, published sources noting that the clitoris has been the subject of sociological analysis and debate, particularly feminist sociology debate. There are clearly reliable, published sources noting that the clitoris has been the subject of sexological debate. There are clearly reliable, published sources noting that the clitoris has been the subject of medical debate. The sentence in the lead you have taken issue with is summarizing both the literature and the article. I didn't add a source for that specific phrasing as it is simply summarizing the article, and the phrasing we use to summarize articles is usually our own. So I did not WP:Synthesize sources on the matter. The main debates concerning the clitoris do concern anatomical accuracy, gender inequality (such as female genital mutilation), orgasmic factors and their physiological explanation for the G-spot. If you are aware of the debates mainly being about anything else, I am open to hearing/reading it. But I have studied this topic for years, and those are the main debates. The only other debates I can think of are the vernacular debates and 'lack of clitoral knowledge' debates, but they also tie into gender inequality. But I could engage in WP:Citation overkill and place a source right up against 'sociological,' and one right up against 'sexological,' and one right up against 'medical,' and then remove 'primarily.' I'd already suggested alternative wording that would remove 'primarily,' but you settled for me simply removing 'extensive'...before revisiting the dispute."


 * But since you replied again, I would rather keep the discussion there at the article's talk page instead of arguing in two different places. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:29, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Interruption (speech) (March 12)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Heliosxeros was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Interruption (speech) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Interruption (speech), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Interruption_(speech) Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Heliosxeros&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Interruption_(speech) reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

EROS message 10:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)