User talk:Michaelgilmore

Welcome!
Hello, Michaelgilmore, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Financial literacy. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! JesseRafe (talk) 13:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Jesse,
 * I am really not clear why you wiped my entire contribution to the financial literacy page. I can understand it may not have been perfect, and possibly far from it, but to wipe it rather than edit it doesn't help. I had two goals with my changes, and was hoping to develop these further.
 * 1) Financial literacy is an increasingly important topic, one that strikes at the heart of accessibility and inclusion - and one of the problems it faces is the language used. The opening sentence of the current definition is a perfect example of overly official language that discourages people from engaging with money. Ie, even the phrase "financial literacy" itself comes under attack for being non-inclusive, a subject I was planning to deal with further down the page later - but wanted to start by correcting with more open, simple language like "awareness of money".
 * 2) The citations on the page are seriously old, and most of them are dated, replaced and/or defunct. I was updating with documents from the UN from this year, and the OECD from the last three years, as opposed to 20 year old documents, as currently cited. This was also something I was planning to do throughout the article, as there is an abundance of new research, new organisations and new projects that are far more important to cite than the existing dated ones.
 * I would greatly appreciate how to move on from here, as I feel loathe to devote the time I devoted to this in anticipation of it being wiped again.
 * Yours
 * Michael Michaelgilmore (talk) 15:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The tone was poor and not the style used on Wikioedia, note the exact quotes given in the edit summary. Our purpose here is not to worry about "overly official language" or accessibility but to write an encyclopedia. There is also the Simple English wiki if you want to contribute to this project with accessibility in mind, or a venue other than Wikipedia if you want to write instructions. The age of sources is not a concern. Many sources used here are hundreds of years old, we don't delete them to replace with Tik Tok because that's new. JesseRafe (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2022 (UTC)