User talk:CalCoWSpiBudSu

Hello, CalCoWSpiBudSu, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Linguistical (talk) 09:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

I have reverted some of the deletions. It looks to me like User:Hipal is a bit of a stickler for the rules; it may be that their deletions are justified, although, myself, being a good deal more of a "if it improves the article, put it in" sort of person, I may not agree. So, we will see how strongly they feel about things. If they press the matter I suspect they will get what they want, since they are probably a lot better at rulesmongering than I am, despite the fact that I've been around Wikipedia for a pretty long time. I don't tend to mess with contentious issues much these days; the Greger article has been on my watchlist for a long time.Brianyoumans (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. Since I’m new to Wikipedia, I feel that speaking up probably wouldn’t make much of a difference. This user hasn’t contributed to improving the article or assisting other editors, they only focused on deleting content without discussion. At the very least, this guy could have sent a message to discuss the issue or offered some guidance, but don't, nothing. That said, I’m actually satisfied because the article on Dr. Michael Greger has improved compared to before. If they decide to remove it, I’ll just take it as an unfortunate outcome and move on. Your support means a lot to me, and I truly appreciate it, for me it's enough. Thank you very much! ^0^ CalCoWSpiBudSu (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article has improved. Thank you both for the excellent work.

I've discussed the issues I see at length. If you'd like assistance, you might find this helpful:

As Brianyoumans mentions, Wikipedia has what are called

Biographies of living persons

have such rules.

My general rule of thumb when encountering a contentious topic that I'm not familiar with is to move on to something else to avoid having to spend time reviewing the current rules to follow and the past problems to avoid. I recommend that inexperienced editors simply move on while they are still learning the basics of working with others here on Wikipedia.

To find the current rules and past problems relevant to a specific contentious topic:

WP:ARBBLP#Final_decision. --Hipal (talk) 18:51, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

This doesn't help the situation at all. --Hipal (talk) 17:43, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]