Jump to content

User:Narziss39

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

Dear Editors, if you're just going to remove everything I try to contribute here, then I don't really see much point in me continuing to add articles to Wikipedia. When Points in Time was deleted a while back, I sucked it up and didn't say anything. Now when I click on Moulin de la Sourdine, it just leads me back to Marcel Ayme's entry. This is just one of many examples. I don't mind constructive criticism, but it seems to have become rather more destructive as of late. Is the entry so bad that it needs to be taken down altogether? Can't you just leave it up, but flag it for whatever work needs to be done on it? I've been contributing to Wikipedia for a long time, and never have the editors been this intrusive. I understand that you're trying to exercise a degree of quality control here, but you treat the books I write about as if they're some strange, far out things that don't deserve space. Is there any danger of running out of room? These are all books by noted writers who have equivalent pages in other languages, so it's not as though I'm just making things up. Even if more or better sourcing is required, I don't think that's a valid reason to just completely remove what I've done. I've almost always marked the articles I've created as stubs for exactly that reason. I feel that I have a lot to contribute, and I'm sorry that the work I've done doesn't measure up to your standards. I used to really enjoy working on articles, but I guess I won't be doing so any more; if this is the response I'm going to get, then honestly it's just not worth my time. I signed in just now to add a footnote to an article I was reading, only to be confronted with an inbox full of discouraging notices. It seems to me that editors used to be encouraging to contributors whereas now they're just quick to remove anything they don't immediately recognize. What's more, the editors are very arbitrary. I believe that I read somewhere Wikipedia in general was worried about losing contributors, maybe this is why. Sorry, but you've just lost another one. I'd be moderately interested to see what, if any, responses I'll get to this, but in the end, honestly, I don't really care.