User talk:MBouchein

The power of words
Hello again MBouchein. Im the editor who contributed about 99% of the current content to our Hunger in the US article. Sorry for the delayed response, I was not checking my watch list in early Oct, so did not see your proposal for the article until just now. I have a few reservations on some of your suggestions for removing content, but overall I think your plan is excellent. I've just wrote in more detail on the article talk page. I also wanted to message you here on a more personal level.

The current article is the result of several weeks work reading and distilling what were at the time the best available books and studies on this topic. Im in my 40s and work mainly in the private sector, but I have several decades of experience in the hunger relief field, ranging from funding and working with small independent soup kitchens to the big multilaterals including the World Bank and the UN's WFP. So I like to think I've good experience for interpreting what the best secondary sources have to say on this issue.

I therefore dont really like to see unequivocal critical comments such as that the article has "minimal information and does not provide readers a comprehensive view" or that "the organization is not logical".

As well as being a little uncollegial, such one sided statements are not even true. Unlike in God's world, in this world good and bad are invariably mixed together. There is a logic in the organisation, just not your preferred logic. Even in pure math, there are many different and partly incompatible logics once you get to the advanced realms. This is far more true of social sciences.

I've been on Wikipedia for 6 years, have been the primary writer for 2 complex GA status article, and have a good feel for the general quality of our articles on hunger relief and dev related topics. Compared to most other articles in these topic classes, this one is in fact quite detailed and informative.

The critical comments would have been better taken if you'd sweetened the pill by saying things like: "While well written, the article could be much more comprehensive". And instead of saying the organisation is "not logical", you could have said "not optimal". Or perhaps better still, just said a different organisation might better serve our readers.

Im not saying you have to sugar coat your comments all the time. Sometimes its helpful to puncture an unduly inflated ego with sharp words. Sometimes overcoming opposition with aggression and main force is both the most effective way to solve problems, and (depending on who you are) deeply satisfying.

But 99% of the time, soft words not only turn away blows,  they get folk on your side rather than create opposition, thus making life more pleasant and making it a lot easier to achieve good outcomes. From decades of experience in both spheres, I would say this approach is just as important if you want to achieve social good as if you wanted success in business. In theory, Wikipedia editors are altruists who donate their time and expertise as they want to make the world a better place with quality free knowledge. But we can be some of the most fussy and quick to take offense folk you'll ever meet, lol.

I hope you understand Im not giving you this feedback to be nasty, just want to share my experience with a young person who seems to have some of the same goals as myself. Its great to see someone arriving with promising ideas to improve our coverage of hunger related topics. For years, other than some help from my incomparable friend NorthAmerica1000, I've felt almost alone on these topics. Finally, please accept this wiki kitten to watch over your talk page! FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:57, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

 FeydHuxtable has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Sex Trafficking
Hi. I've declined your speedy request, as while you created the content as an article, you didn't create the page. I've reverted you back to the redirect as this was a Keep at RfD and should only be deleted after a revisit to RfD. Isn't editing Wikipedia fun? Peridon (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Peridon, I understand but can it please be deleted? I removed the redirect for Sex trafficking in the search box to Human trafficking and started expanding the Sex trafficking page. Does this make sense?MBouchein (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Replied at my page. Peridon (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 17 March
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Sex trafficking page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=651814374 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F651814374%7CSex trafficking%5D%5D Ask for help])

Disambiguation link notification for April 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex trafficking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White slavery. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)