User talk:Qw23

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Useful links


Hello, Qw23, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, Qw23!

Please explain why your changes are positive for the article. We usually don't like major article changes without a sufficient explanation. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
you were probably right about the flu shot, that I should not delete material before putting it somewhere else, but I am not sure why you reverted me here [1]. Qw23 (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
Frankly, you're a brand new editor here, and you're revamping an article -- that's good, but please tell us what you're going, in more detail, and why? Your changes are not necessarily bad (maybe they're very good), but I saw that you removed quite a bit of info and reorganized the article. Big changes like this should be explained. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:27, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
I have some experience on wikipedia, but was pushed out a few years ago for disapproving of some admins' political editorializing(treating Europe-style big govt as factually correct rather then an opinion) , but I found CP to have less and lower quality content and wanted to improve it, the lead of the vaccine article was written a bit confusingly and I think how vaccines work/what they are should come before what diseases they have eliminated. I also found it odd that the lead was so much about policy, which I think should be in a different article vaccine policy?( but I will do that before I delete anything)
That sounds good -- I'm no fan of Europe's policies myself (as a dual citizen of a European country). Just as long as you don't remove any info (unless it's clear vandalism/parody/leftist bias), and if you make the articles clearer to understand, then I think you're good to edit. However, I saw in your very first edit that you removed some info while reorganizing it (based on the fact that the article lost over 800 bytes). I strongly recommend that you at least make clear that you removed and why (and if it's sourced and non-parody, etc., I recommend just keeping it and possibly re-word). --1990'sguy (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
Thanks Qw23 (talk) 17:50, 8 May 2018 (EDT)
It's always good to have subject matter experts work on articles, so it's great that you can use your knowledge to make the Vaccine page better. I was a little confused as to why the paragraph on exemptions was removed, but I see that it has been restored, so I see no problems. Please pardon our paranoia, but due at least in part to our political leaning, we are the target of a fair amount of vandalism. When we see a new user start deleting a quantity of data, we get a little nervous. Thanks for your work on this article--I'm sure you'll do fine! --David B (TALK) 19:05, 8 May 2018 (EDT)