User talk:Ymach9

Welcome
Your page on the Joanna Russ novel is up for deletion, and you probably don't understand why, and Wikipedia probably doesn't seem like a welcoming place right now. The problem is that your article has run up against some Wikipedia policies, no original research and what we're not. Also, as a review, it is not neutral. (Another reason that articles commonly get deleted is insufficient notability of the topic, but the novel probably passes in this regard.)

I hope that you do not get discouraged. Many new users create articles without being aware of our policies, and get hard feelings at having their hard work thrown away. Please don't. You could find another, more appropriate venue for your essay (maybe you could post a review at Amazon). Also, since the novel is probably sufficiently notable for an article, you could use your knowledge of the novel in a new article (just don't add your personal opinions).

I'm appending below, the standard Wikipedia welcome greeting, that has some possibly helpful links and explanations. -- Groggy Dice T | C 08:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name 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. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Congratulations!
It's now clear that your article is going to be kept (and moved to And Chaos Died), as revised by Metamagician3000 and others. Although I didn't recognize the revised version, comparing the versions shows that a substantial part of your work survives. Great work by Metamagician in taking something that at first glance looked unsalvageably POV and first-person, and seeing its potential for a creditable article.

I hope you feel better about Wikipedia now. It shows the power of letting editors revise each other's work. Though some writers have trouble letting their "deathless prose" be "tampered" with, it also allows for improvement and expansion. You might want to study the current version to get an idea of how we like articles to be written to avoid POV and the other issues we saw in your original version, and contribute to Wikipedia again. -- Groggy Dice T | C 22:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)