Wazronk
|
|
Question About Collaborative Editing edit
Hi Wazronk:
I have a question. You seem to be one of the main editors on the article on the Urantia Book. I wanted to see how I might go about suggesting some edits before I actually do them so I can benefit from feedback. Where and how (or should) I go about this. I am new to Wiki and would appreciate someone to bounce ideas around with.
Thanks,
--Dogyo (talk) 02:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Wazronk,
Boy have I been busy. I just saw your note on my talk page (Feb 2010) and I would like to chat a bit how to make some changes to TUB article, but I was hoping on collaborating and running them by someone first. Where and how might we go about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogyo (talk • contribs) 15:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Sadler edit
Hi Wazronk, thanks for the copyedits and infobox for Sadler. If you have any larger changes that you would like to make, please suggest them on the talk page first. Since this is a featured article, the grammar and prose have to be kept to a very high standard, and it helps if we have a few people looking at it first. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yep no problem, I've added a fuller explanation on the talk page. Wazronk (talk) 18:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- I had been hoping you would wait for a discussion of your explanation first, per WP:BRD. Not a big deal though, I guess. Also, there are only a relatively small amount of changes you wish to make the the article, right? Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was splitting my edits up to be discrete and step by step so they can be closely examined one by one, go for it. Great to know you have all the sources on hand. For further edits I'll continue to keep my edit comments as full as I can make them and explain on the talk page as well. I don't see large scale changes being needed, I think the most significant points for clarification are what I've already touched on with my edits and comments, I'll let you know after I have another chance to double check. Congrats on bringing the article to FA status! After seeing it I'd like to bring the same thorough referencing system to the UB article, which I've worked on off and on over a few years. Wazronk (talk) 19:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I had a good time working on the article. The person who did the referencing system for Sadler is Br'er Rabbit. I bet he'd love to help you with other articles. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was splitting my edits up to be discrete and step by step so they can be closely examined one by one, go for it. Great to know you have all the sources on hand. For further edits I'll continue to keep my edit comments as full as I can make them and explain on the talk page as well. I don't see large scale changes being needed, I think the most significant points for clarification are what I've already touched on with my edits and comments, I'll let you know after I have another chance to double check. Congrats on bringing the article to FA status! After seeing it I'd like to bring the same thorough referencing system to the UB article, which I've worked on off and on over a few years. Wazronk (talk) 19:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- I had been hoping you would wait for a discussion of your explanation first, per WP:BRD. Not a big deal though, I guess. Also, there are only a relatively small amount of changes you wish to make the the article, right? Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)