User talk:Drgood13
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Drgood13, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Peer Review
In your article, I helped form sentences and revised minimal grammatical errors, as well as replace words to better summarize points. Juannafalcon (talk) 23:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)Juanna Falcon
Response to Peer Review: Thank you for the edits! We will continue working on developing the content. Drgood13 (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2017 (UTC)Drgood13
Article draft
[edit]I moved your draft back to your sandbox, User:Drgood13/sandbox because it wasn't yet ready to go "live" in the main article space in Wikipedia. Articles shouldn't go "live" while they still include editorial comments, outlines, things like that. Articles don't have to be "complete" before they move to mainspace, but they shouldn't include notes and plans of what you want to do. Things that are in the mainspace should be ready for readers. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Policies and guidelines
[edit]Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Please take time to read the following policies carefully:
Important things to note:
- Wikipedia itself, or any user-generated or crowdsourced content, shouldn't be cited as a source. See WP:CIRCULAR.
- When reverting (undoing another user's edit), you must explain in detail the reasons for the revert, either in the edit summary or on the article talk page. Failing to explain a revert or engage with another user's expressed concerns is considered discourteous within our community.
- Do not insert or reinsert unsourced content. That's part of our Wikipedia:Verifiability policy.
As to the article you created, indigenous rights to land along rivers, the content in this article really should belong in another article, such as indigenous land rights, or Aboriginal title. You should add new, sourced content to those articles rather than creating a new one. Neutralitytalk 23:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Once more
[edit]I've nominated the article you created for deletion for the reasons I outlined above. Please, please take an hour or so to actually read core Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Neutralitytalk 01:07, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hey Neutrality, I apologize for any confusion. I was just trying to restore our content. I am not a Wikipedia expert and apologize if I stepped on anyone's toes. I also did not see a start to a conversation but would happily engage in one to make sure all parties are on the same page. This project is being done for a grade in a UCB course and to have all of that suddenly disappear is very disconcerting. I hope you understand we are students and if we had to redo the work we have done it would be extremely time consuming and we would suffer from that. The content of the page was a discussion of the land and water rights to set a stage to discuss our EJ case studies/subsections on Shasta, North Dakota, Colorado and the Klamath. We can link this page to the land rights page as well as the other relevant wiki pages that were already linked. Additionally, we have not finalized the project yet and will continue to edit the content for neutrality and overall cohesiveness. If it is still concerning and you think the page still needs to be redirected please let us know so that we can make sure the content is not lost. Drgood13 (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2017 (UTC)Drgood13