User talk:SuperSonic8.0

El Chaltén
Hello, I just wanted to let you know why I've removed your additions to El Chaltén. Thank you for trying to improve the article. However, your work should really be more original. What you added was a loose rephrasing of the two sources you cited. Your phrasing introduced various grammatical errors and resulted in the text not making much sense. You are welcome to add to Wikipedia, but you may want to have someone check your work before submitting. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 03:00, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I have again removed your additions to El Chaltén. I'm sorry to have to say this, but your grasp of English doesn't seem to be good enough for these edits to remain. Several times, you have barely paraphrased your source, which is not good enough for Wikipedia - your work needs to be original. The changes you made to the wording, have resulted in language that doesn't make much sense. For instance, you keep changing "rugged" to "ragged" - they have different meanings.


 * You keep referring to "350 years of residents." This means "people have lived there for 350 years." Your wording is a paraphrasing of the original source, which says "350 year-round residents." That means "350 people who live there during all seasons of the year." The two things have very different meanings. Because you are misunderstanding the original meaning, you are adding untrue statements to the article.


 * There are other issues with your additions to this article. You have added sources which are related to the topic, but which do not support your claims. This is inappropriate. Wikipedia is supposed to be structured like this:


 * "Statement of fact about El Chaltén. (Reference specifically supporting this claim.)"


 * Instead, your recent edits are structured like this:


 * "Statement of fact about El Chaltén. (Reference which is related to El Chaltén, but which has nothing to do with your statement.)"


 * Please familiarize yourself more with Wikipedia's rules and conventions before adding again. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 20:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

It is inappropriate to remove maintenance tags, as you did at El Chaltén, without addressing the issue. "Clarification needed", "citation needed", and other tags are added by editors for good reasons. They are useful tools that help other editors find issues that need fixing. I let your edit remain, even though it contains a very confusing sentence ("The high winds make it very dangerous which occurs often.") Either fix the sentence so that it makes sense, or leave the "clarification needed" tag stay.

I have removed the most recent additions you made to the article; please see my edit summary for an explanation. In short, they did not improve the article.

It would be courteous to let me know you are receiving these messages. Jessicapierce (talk) 06:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)