User talk:Kdelf

Welcome to Wikipedia
tedder (talk) 17:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Eugene SD
Hi- do you work for the Eugene SD? It's good to state your COI (see WP:COI); the edits you've been making include some information not terribly suitable for Wikipedia.

Some other guidelines:
 * Don't put external links (like this link) in the article
 * Don't Use Capital Letters In Section Titles (it should be "Don't use capital letters..")
 * Use reliable sources in your citations, and most of them should NOT be primary sources (the school district's site)

In general, some of the changes have made the article look more like a brochure for the school district, which isn't what Wiki is for. Let me know if you have questions. tedder (talk) 01:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

-- Hi, Tedder!

I do work for Eugene 4J, and can be confident that all of the information I have added is completely correct. I spotted several inaccuracies (e.g. closed schools still being listed) in the Wikipedia page and thought they should be corrected, then went on to expand the article from its original stub state. I've tried to provide relevant information in a neutral and non-promotional way, while feeling confident that other, more experienced Wikipedia editors would change anything they thought unsuitable, and hopefully add information from their own knowledge and perspectives!

My affiliation is clearly noted in my account information, but I'm not sure who can see that — I created an account instead of making anonymous edits as I have done (on non-4J-related pages) in the past, so the conflict of interest would be stated...but is there somewhere else I can and should list it?

Thanks for the tips on formatting — I was trying to be internally consistent within the article, and didn't realize that my formatting was contrary to general Wikipedia style. Good to know.

A n00b question for you: I made one batch of edits, correcting a whole bunch of inaccuracies in the middle school list, and also making some more minor changes to internal content. That batch of edits appeared to have been reverted in toto. So when I had a little time to add more information and make more corrections, I did it in small batches, clearly stating the content changes in the edit summary each time. What do you think? Better to do big edits all at once, or lots of small edits, so others can see clearly what is being changed? Thanks!

Kdelf (talk) 08:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, just realized I hadn't responded to this. I've had a bit of a crisis revolving around my computer, finally getting a new system up and running, so off the temporary, small, and slow laptop. What you've done for stating the COI (here is perfect. Some of your earlier edits were sketchy, honestly, but you've been making a wider range of edits and citing things better. Way to go.


 * For the n00b question, a couple of things. First, check the article history to see if an edit summary was used in the revert, who did it, etc. Often they will say the reason they were reverted. The general rule is to improve rather than mass-revert someone's changes, but if they are 80% or 90% junk, the baby will get tossed out with the bathwater, so to speak. Next up is to contact the editor who reverted it if you aren't sure. Don't re-add things (it's getting close to edit warring if you do). If nothing else, discuss it on the talk page. If it's controversial, promotes COI, etc, just post it to the talk page, wait a couple of days for responses, and then (assuming nobody replies) feel free to add it to the article. Obviously, that's only for things that are in "your" favor- saying the ESD did a really good job at X.


 * I did notice something, though- on this edit, external links aren't looked on terribly favorably. First, the "offical" link is already in the infobox (higher on the page), so it doesn't need to be duplicated. Second, wikilinks are preferred over external links, so that gets rid of the need for a school district link. Third, more than one official link to an organization isn't needed- it's up to the org to design their website so one link is sufficient. Imagine I was writing about Amazon.com. I'd have an official link to amazon.com, but would I also need one to books.amazon.com, clothing.amazon.com, etc? Not really. This is all addressed in WP:EL fairly well.


 * Cheers, and it's nice to see you around. Have you seen WikiProject Oregon? If not, I'll send you an invite. tedder (talk) 07:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Survey
Hi Kdelf!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)