User talk:71.109.234.47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I noticed you are known only as an IP address; that means you are not signed up. To sign up, you only need to click Create account and choose a username and password. You don't need to provide any personal information. If you sign up, you'll have a username that others can use to recognize you and leave you messages on the wiki. You'll be able to sign your name just by typing four tildes (~~~~) when you leave someone else a message. Plus, you (and others) will easily be able to see a list of all your contributions to Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask at the Village pump, or feel free to ask me on my talk page.

I noticed your edits to Magic Johnson -- these were interesting, but I see another editor deleted them. That's probably because of some mix of:

• We don't really express our own opinions on Wikipedia; see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (sometimes abbreviated NPOV). For instance, "His .520 career field goal percentage is amazing for a guard" -- "amazing" is your opinion, the rest of this is factual. Others' opinions can also be cited if they are someone credible. For example "Michael Jordan called this record 'amazing'" or "ESPN commentator John Doe said it was 'amazing'".
• Wikipedia edits have to be backed up by credible, external evidence; see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research. The editors on the NBA-related pages tend to be especially feisty and quick-triggered on deletions, so even your factual items need to be backed by a credible URL (for instance, an NBA.com or ESPN page). In the example above, you can embed the link in the text by linking ".520 career goal" to the supporting page or you could just put the URL in the edit summary at the bottom of the edit page.

I hope this is helpful. Again, welcome to Wikipedia.
--A. B. 17:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I understand this but in general, Wikipedia is full of opinion and I would hardly consider my change a big deal. Also, it is true that a 52% field goal percentage is excellent for an outside player, especially when you consider that even high percentage centers do around 56%

In general, you're right that what I've suggested is pretty picky, but then the NBA pages are one big battlefield -- trust me, you'll want to do these things. I don't like some of the arbitrary deleting that goes on by some of the more "experienced" editors that hang out those pages. On most other articles, you'd probably have seen someone like me delete the "amazing" and then assume the rest was probably factual. Or I might have dropped you a polite note suggesting you back up your factoid with a link or a reference. But I wouldn't just delete it out of hand if it seemed reasonable. But these are the NBA pages -- they make the partisan editing on the Bush, Kerry , Karl Rove, and Iraq war pages look downright genteel. I've locked horns with the guy that deleted your stuff -- his message in his edit summary: "reverted edits not consistent with quality of article - speculations, sweeping generalisations - not appropriate here" was about as informative and polite as I've ever seen him use (perhaps because people have started giving him heat for unexplained deletions, even accusations of vandalism against innocent editors).

So my point wasn't to criticize you but rather to help you bolster your credibility. Regards, --A. B. 04:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your honesty. It is really too bad that people on here can be so petty and arbitrary.

If it's any consolation, it's much less petty and arbitrary off the NBA pages. Downwards' behavior on the NBA pages breaks a lot of rules about civility, newcomers, etc. but has not been so egregious as to draw Administrator attention. Also, Downwards is actually sort of a Wild West sheriff -- he nails the tons of bad guys (lots on the NBA pages) but is not discriminating or tactful in dealing the innocent.

I don't follow the NBA, but I do welcome a few new users every week that I see adding useful content (even if it's a little flawed -- not NPOV, etc.). I sort of track them for a while to see they don't get jumped on. I happened to see your stuff because I was tracking another newcomer, TheAnimal, who was accused of vandalism by Downwardsafter adding to the Tim Duncan article. (Downwards used "rvv" -- revert vandalism -- in his edit summary). See:

• Talk:Tim Duncan#Greg Newton and other unexplained reverts by Downwards?
• User talk:Downwards#Please do not bite the newcomers
• User talk:Downwards#Inappropriate assertions of vandalism (Ignore the running battle below my text -- the guy that's complaining piggybacked on my comments. He has created a lot of problems on the NBA pages and Downwards has probably been more right than wrong in dealing with him. Downwards' responses are in red.)
• User talk:The Animal#RE: Your Tracy McGrady edit
• User talk:128.91.107.150#Inappropriate assertion of vandalism by user Downwards
• User talk:Brianfast -- note the hypocrisy of the "blindly revert" comment

I play no official role and I'm no administrator -- I just got really annoyed to see a newcomer abused. It was in following up on another newcomer's mugging that I noticed you got mugged, too. I'm tiring of the NBA pages and will stop tracking this stuff in a day or two -- you and The Animal seem sophisiticated enough to handle yourselves if you follow the stuff I've put on this page and on some of the pages I just cited above.

I hope you'll consider doing the same for newcomers once you get your feet on the ground. I go to Special:New pages and look for new articles contributed by people without user pages or talk pages (i.e., red links). I look to see if the articles have merit, then if they do, I put a welcome template Wikipedia:Welcome template table on their talk page, add a personal comment about their article (with maybe a pointer, as I did with you) and then put both the person and the new page on my watch list for a week or so. If they get mugged or their page gets zapped, I try to help them.

I strongly encourage you to get a user account Special:Sign in / create account and use edit summaries:

When editing an article, there is a small field labeled "Summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this

Anonymous contributors' edits get much closer scrutiny as potential vandalism, advertisements, vanity articles, etc. as do un-summarized edits.

Finally, I have a hard time keeping track of rules, resources, etc., so I built my a user subpage of links for my own benefit -- sort of a bookmark page. Feel free to use it: User:A. B./Useful Wikipedia links.

Got to run; no time to proof the above. --A. B. 14:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

---

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [IP info · Traceroute · WHOIS · Abuse · City · RDNS] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean]