48,466
edits
User talk:Lemming: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Statistics and archive: sp
m (→Statistics and archive: sp) |
|||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
:::This feels like military camp compared to other wikis that let you put content of ''any'' quality up.--[[User:Lemming|Lemming]] ([[User talk:Lemming|talk]]) 11:32, 31 December 2013 (PST) | :::This feels like military camp compared to other wikis that let you put content of ''any'' quality up.--[[User:Lemming|Lemming]] ([[User talk:Lemming|talk]]) 11:32, 31 December 2013 (PST) | ||
::::Yeah, I'm sure it does. But your own words validate our approach. Wikis that let users' insert "content of ''any'' quality" will ultimately lower the overall standard and reliability of their site. We are one of the few sites about Islam, if not the only one, which is taken seriously by people other than "anti-jihadists". That would not be the case if we were to give everyone a free run. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 11:46, 31 December 2013 (PST) | ::::Yeah, I'm sure it does. But your own words validate our approach. Wikis that let users' insert "content of ''any'' quality" will ultimately lower the overall standard and reliability of their site. We are one of the few sites about Islam, if not the only one, which is taken seriously by people other than "anti-jihadists". That would not be the case if we were to give everyone a free run. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 11:46, 31 December 2013 (PST) | ||
:::::This is getting tiring. You're still not doing it right. Look at [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=Muslim_Statistics_-_Education_and_Employment&diff=prev&oldid=101982 | :::::This is getting tiring. You're still not doing it right. Look at [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=Muslim_Statistics_-_Education_and_Employment&diff=prev&oldid=101982 your edits] vs [http://wikiislam.net/w/index.php?title=Muslim_Statistics_-_Education_and_Employment&diff=101988&oldid=101982 my corrections]. When you put a "<nowiki><BR>. . .<BR></nowiki>" in between text, it indicates the preceding text is from a different paragraph. I.e. people who read it will know there was some sentences in between that were not quoted for relevancy or brevity. You did not do that. You simply put in one "<nowiki><BR></nowiki>". This is something that reader would not be able to see without pressing "edit" and viewing the formatting. To them, it would appear that there was nothing missed out. You did a similar thing lower down; where there should have been a "..." you placed a "<nowiki><BR></nowiki>". Then there is the fact that you cut a sentence in the middle (i.e. "pupils of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin performing poorly in comparison to other minority groups ''while at the same time doing better than their socio-economic position would suggest''"). You only cut off sentences like that if what is cut is not relevant. This could be interpreted as quote-mining/misrepresenting sources or whatever. Do ''not'' do it. If you cannot quote a source without butchering it, what does that tell you? Just do not quote it. You keep on focusing on certain things and I think it's also hurting the pages in a way. We're ending up with a long confusing wall of text that no one will want to read or will understand. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 12:31, 31 December 2013 (PST) | ||