Difference between revisions of "User talk:Zindikasheen"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Zindikasheen (talk | contribs) (New page: Well dangit I keep trying to help with the wiki and keep gettin my revisions overwritten. I fail I guess. >_< --~~~~) |
(Reply) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Well dangit I keep trying to help with the wiki and keep gettin my revisions overwritten. I fail I guess. >_< --[[User:Zindikasheen|Zindikasheen]] 23:01, 26 February 2009 (CST) | Well dangit I keep trying to help with the wiki and keep gettin my revisions overwritten. I fail I guess. >_< --[[User:Zindikasheen|Zindikasheen]] 23:01, 26 February 2009 (CST) | ||
+ | |||
+ | : On the contrary, you're definitely helping improve the wiki. While some edits may be reverted, that points out weaknesses in the existing articles. Maybe something wasn't explained clearly enough (and that's why someone tried to add incorrect info). Maybe something wasn't documented properly (and that's why someone figured it was incorrect). Maybe the editor doesn't know about a certain guideline (and by breaking it he makes someone explain). | ||
+ | : There's also the motivation factor. There are lots and lots of wiki pages that need improving, but there are so many it's hard to pick anywhere to start. But if someone else makes an edit, that article is singled out in recentchanges. It's a lot easier to do extra improvement when you're already checking out the diff. | ||
+ | : So even if an edit is reverted, as long as you learn something, or the revert adds something extra to the article, or the revert leads to someone starting a talk page discussion, etc... then the overall wiki has improved. You just have to keep trying. :-) - [[User:Dashiva|Dashiva]] 23:23, 26 February 2009 (CST) |
Revision as of 06:23, 27 February 2009
Well dangit I keep trying to help with the wiki and keep gettin my revisions overwritten. I fail I guess. >_< --Zindikasheen 23:01, 26 February 2009 (CST)
- On the contrary, you're definitely helping improve the wiki. While some edits may be reverted, that points out weaknesses in the existing articles. Maybe something wasn't explained clearly enough (and that's why someone tried to add incorrect info). Maybe something wasn't documented properly (and that's why someone figured it was incorrect). Maybe the editor doesn't know about a certain guideline (and by breaking it he makes someone explain).
- There's also the motivation factor. There are lots and lots of wiki pages that need improving, but there are so many it's hard to pick anywhere to start. But if someone else makes an edit, that article is singled out in recentchanges. It's a lot easier to do extra improvement when you're already checking out the diff.
- So even if an edit is reverted, as long as you learn something, or the revert adds something extra to the article, or the revert leads to someone starting a talk page discussion, etc... then the overall wiki has improved. You just have to keep trying. :-) - Dashiva 23:23, 26 February 2009 (CST)