User talk:Dec2057

Welcome!

Hello, Dec2057, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help How to write a great article Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place on your talk page and ask your question there.

January 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add content (particularly if you change facts and please cite a reliable source for the content you're adding or changing.  This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Siawase (talk) 13:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

MBT
Re Masai Barefoot Technology: I believe your claim to be an unbiased third party. I have restored your text to User:Dec2057/MBT. The main problem is a total absence of references. You must provide links to reliable sources that show the product is notable. You also need to change it to a more encyclopedic tone. Given the past history of the article, I am unwilling to restore it. But if you take it to deletion review, I will probably support you. Alternatively, try writing the rocker shoe article which discusses the generic product and mentions MBT as one manufacturer. &mdash; RHaworth 04:05, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Rocker bottom shoe has now been created. &mdash; RHaworth 16:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Reborn dolls
Your edit to reborn dolls is problematic and may be reverted, because: 1) you remove referenced text and add unreferenced claims (WP:V) and 2) you add new information to the lead (where lead should only summarize information present elsewhere in the article - see WP:LEAD). Please fix your edit, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2013
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 07:55, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know much about the protocol of editing wikipedia pages but I do know that the page on reborn dolls is fraught with misinformation, self aggrandizement of individuals and businesses for profit and self interest with little regard to actual fact. I am an expert reborner and would like to see the information on the page to be accurate and unbiased with the truth about reborns and reborners portrayed. I am not interested in credit for the information or thanks for my help, but concerned with accuracy of information and educating the general public as to the realities in the world of reborning.

1. Doll KITS, not dolls are now used for reborning. Doll kits have not been used for many years. 2. 'Newborning' was a term coined by Secrist Dolls that never caught on. It was a failed attempt to corner the market and claim power to be a one stop resource for others to spend money at their business. They are being sold out to someone else willing to take the risk of a failed business attempt. 3. Cindy Kohlscheen was drummed out of business (very visibly on the news and TV) for her scams and lies in the reborning world. Any references given from her are suspect, in the very least, and should be removed. She is actually hated by many in the reborning world for her atrocities to the art of reborning in the name of greed. 4. The methodology of reborning is incorrectly stated. Compare the old version to my updated version.

- these are just some of the problems with the old page. I would be happy to enlist other expert reborners, as well, to assist in accurate changes to the page if you are interested.

At any rate - if wikipedia is concerned with truth, fairness in reporting and removing old, inaccurate or misleading information - then good - Approve the changes I made. If not, and there is no concern for truth and expert help in the subject matter, then carry on as you are.

dec2057


 * Thank you for your contribution! The template I used was rude, and I apologize for that. Wikipedia has a policy of WP:VERIFIABILITY. Your edits show a great deal of knowledge on the subject, but we need to have reliable sources (WP:RS) that allow people to verify what you are saying. These sources don't, by the way, need to be online. If you know of magazines or other print articles that discuss the issue, I would be happy to help you incorporate them into the article. I recommend using Talk:Reborn doll, so that other editors can easily follow our discussion. Again, thanks for your contributions. Grayfell (talk) 03:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. I will contact other reborn experts and masters to see if I can get a collaborative work going to upgrade the reborn dolls page. I appreciate your input as I know a great deal about reborning but not much about wikipedia protocol, and knowledge of 'how' to have an accurate reborn dolls page is as important as the knowledge to be imparted therein.

dec2057


 * Glad I could be of assistance. Wikipedia can be daunting. If you would like to get better acquainted with it, the WP:Teahouse is a great place to ask questions. Also, don't forget to WP:SIGN your talk page posts by typing four tildes, like this: ~ . Happy editing! Grayfell (talk) 03:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)