-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Lester D.K. Chow and Associates wrote:
I wrote additions to the topics of "Eber," "Joktan," and the "Zhou Dynasty." My family's dynasty of which I am a qualified expert. In history, there are conflicting interpretations as to events and dates. I think that it is wrong to only allow one view to dominate and to not publish all valid views. Somehow, your editors erased what I had republished about two or three hours ago (my time, at this writing, is August 17, 2005, 11:10 p.m.). Then, too, I think that it is wrong for people (the general public) to erase all of the hard work and time that you have put into your article and to continually erase it every time you post.
Hi,
Because I'm not the person who removed your contributions I'm doing a bit of second-guessing here.
The reasons I think your contributions were removed is because you did not write them in an encyclopediac manner. Encyclopedias are typically written in the third-person, while yours was written in the first-person. You also added some sentences which are more appropriate in individual essays debating a point (e.g. "I would like to add some information to the above article, in correction of the above article, about Eber").
Most of what you have written appears to be useful, but the way you have written it is not how articles should be written. Try correcting the article directly rather than adding a paragraph saying what is wrong with it (known on Wikipedia as "being bold"), and make sure you cite sources.
Have a look at Wikipedia's Manual of Style on article writing: --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style
Hope this helps,
Chris
- -- Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org