User talk:Dangodia

Superdelegate source
Hello Dangodia. First off, since you've recently registered this username, I'm assuming you're relatively new to editing Wikipedia. I'd like to welcome you to our community. Thanks for taking an interest in improving Wikipedia! Second, I'd like to address our recent back and forth edits on Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2008. I agree that there may be some very compelling reasons to change the source we're using for superdelegate counts. The thing is, the issue of whether to use DemConWatch or the List of Democratic Party (United States) superdelegates, 2008 article you've mentioned has already been discussed several times by several editors on the talk page of the primaries article. The consensus has been to continue using DemConWatch. We can certainly revisit that decision, but it's generally considered bad form to make changes to articles that go against previous consensus, as you have done. I ask you to please revert your most recent edits to the aritcle and instead post your arguments on the article's talk page if you'd like to see a change. Who knows? You may succeed in changing the other editors' minds and making an enduring change to the article. If you have any questions about any of this, you can ask them right here on your user talk page. I'll keep an eye on it for a while and offer any help I can. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 04:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with Bryan, and with the other editors who have reverted you. Also please note that Wikipedia has a three revert rule. This means that you cannot revert (or undo) changes by other editors more than three times in the course of 24 hours. You have already done this. Normally this would be cause for a brief block of your account, but as a new editor I assume you are unfamiliar with this rule so no worries. Please do not continue to make this change to the article though, otherwise it is likely you will be reported for reverting more than three times. As Bryan says, the thing to do is to post your argument on the talk page and see if you can get other editors to agree with you. Wikipedia operates by consensus, so in order to make controversial changes you need to get others to agree with your arguments.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 05:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes i am new to Wikipedia. And I do not know the rules and most likeley i am verbaly not as educated as many people here. So going to a talk page...(where is that) Making a case. (What is that)... I am really sorry for changing the page but i think this is an importend issue. The question is why is DemConWatch blog is more credible source than the Wikipedia page? Right? I think the source with the higest credibility should be used. So why do you prefer DemConWatch? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangodia (talk • contribs) 06:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't worry too much if you "broke the rules". We all had to learn them (and broke some rules ourselves in the process!). The important thing is to listen when another editor points out an error you made and then to read about the rule (other editors will usually supply a link to more information about the rule). Also, while a good command of English is helpful for this English version of Wikipedia, it certainly isn't required. Many editors who speak other languages and have only a limited English vocabulary still make some great contributions here. The same is true for young editors who are still learning to read and write or editors with a limited education. Whatever your situation, we're happy to have any constructive help you can provide.
 * A talk page (also called a discussion page) is where editors can discuss the articles they are editing. Every article has its own talk page. If you look at the tabs at the top of any Wikipedia page, you'll see a tab called "discussion". Click on it and you'll see all the comments editors have made about the article. You can add your own comment to any ongoing discussion or you can start a new discussion by clicking on the "new section" tab at the top of the page. For more information on talk pages, see WP:TP. Here's a link for the talk page of the article you were trying to change: Talk:Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2008.
 * One important thing you should know about putting comments on a talk page: always sign your comments. This means that you should type four tilde symbols ( ~ ) at the end of your comments. After you save your comments, the Wikipedia software will replace the tilde symbols with your username and the date/time. That way other editors can tell who typed the comments and when.
 * When I suggested "making a case", I just meant that you should visit the talk page and write your reasons there for why we should switch to using the Wikipedia superdelegates article instead of DemConWatch. That way other editors can respond to your reasons (and you can respond to the other editors). After some discussion hopefully most everyone will agree on which source they want to use. Provide your best reasons, but be willing to accept it if most of the other editors disagree with you (you never know, though, maybe most of them will agree with you).
 * We should probably have most of our discussion about which superdelegate source is best on the article's talk page. I will give you one reason here that editors have decided against using the Wikipedia superdelegates article: they felt that the article relied too heavily on the Clinton and Obama campaign web sites for their sources of superdelegate endorsements and that the campaign web sites would be too biased toward their own candidates to trust. Anyway, let's not discuss it too much on this page. Instead, let's discuss it on the article talk page where other editors will see it and can participate, too.
 * Best of luck as you learn the ropes at Wikipedia. If you have more questions, you can ask them here or leave a message for me on my own talk page: User talk:Bryan H Bell. You can also find lots of information at Help:Contents and you can ask questions at WP:HELPDESK. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 10:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)