Wiki101012
Third region of Malaysia
editHowdy and welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed your edit to the Malaysia article. I wasn't clear what third region you were talking about; it is pretty clearly two from the information I have seen. Can you clarify? I have reverted your change. Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 07:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
How do I talk to you? Is this the way? Just checking out wiki's reliability issues. I'm just interested to know how the pages are moderated? Thanks!
- This works! Pages are watched by a variety of means. We prefer you not test Wikipedia by inserting false information. This has been done many times (and in fact, we're constantly watching for vandalism). It is a bit like calling 911 to test response times (it just takes people's time unnecessarily). Sure it is good information to know, but less intrusive means of getting it are preferred. There are multiple mechanisms for catching vandalism. The first lines of defense are bots and edit filters which monitor all edits for obvious problems. There are also a number of actual people who monitor recent changes for anything which might slip by. Finally many editors "watch" some collection of articles and check the information added to it. That's how I picked up your edit; I watch the Malaysia article (and many others). If you're interested in studying the time to revert vandalism, a better approach might be to select an article at random and look through the page history. High traffic article nearly always attract vandals, and you can measure the time until someone reverts the edit. Thanks for your interest and let me know if there's any questions I can answer. --TeaDrinker (talk) 07:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page Quaternion, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the "sandbox" rather than in articles.
If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.
I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 07:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Great! Thanks to both of you! My lecturer hates us when we quote anything from Wiki. According to him, info in Wiki is unreliable, and anyone could modify any page any time. So I'm doing this little experiment (which eventually I'll revert my modifications, but I don't have to now). It seems you guys are doing a good job in moderating. Sorry for the inconvenience caused. No more "vandalism" from me. Cheers! =D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki101012 (talk • contribs)
- Glad to hear it. We have an article on the Reliability of Wikipedia which might be of interest to you. I will note, however, I teach at the university level as well and ask my students not to use Wikipedia as a primary source. The problems are less issues of reliability and more that part of developing a good research skill-set involves primary literature review and independent synthesis. I don't mind if students start at Wikipedia (since it usually has a bunch of sources listed and provides a good overview of many topics), but insist they move beyond that in their work. Hope this helps and let me know if you have any other questions! --TeaDrinker (talk) 07:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)