Content deleted Content added
AndyTheGrump (talk | contribs) →So?: r to Dicklyon |
|||
Line 394:
:::It's mess, true; but if someone thought the content was heading in a good direction they could edit the language easily enough. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 05:14, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
::::Possibly, if (a) it was clear what was intended, and (b) the sources being cited for the content were actually given. I get the impression that this is the 'write first, and then find sources to back it up' editing that this article has suffered from before. There is a long history of IPs contributing almost incomprehensible [[WP:OR]] to this article (see for example [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Technical_analysis&diff=511688664&oldid=511649546]), and adding more in the hope that someone will sort it out later just isn't acceptable. I suspect, given the fact that the IP responsible for the earlier incomprehensible edit I linked was from Sao Paulo, Brazil, like the current one, that it is the same individual, who simply isn't capable of writing in English to the degree required - and perhaps more to the point, isn't capable of understanding why their edits are problematic. It is entirely reasonable to make allowances for contributors who don't have English as a first language - but only to the extent that it doesn't make a nonsense of our articles. This is a difficult subject, and it needs careful editing, based on a clear understanding of appropriate published reliable sources, and of Wikipedia policy regarding how such sources are used. Without this, the article will revert back to the mess that it has been in the past. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 06:34, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
| |||