User talk:David Tornheim

I'm not new.

FYI. I have been editing since 2008. No need to put a welcome template. David Tornheim (talk) 16:58, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks on remarks

I am taking weeks to study what happened re Civil War. This message is just fyi to read next month. Thanks for asking reasons why they opposed my updates in WP, and joining with others to question fairness. I was worried when some users strongly opposed your comments. Anyway, thank you for suggesting a lighter restriction, as a plausible way back.

I apologize for pretending to be less intelligent than expected, but I didn't want to discourage other users by saying how hopeless WP updates would be in the major articles. Actually, I estimated how updates to popular pages on a major WP would likely burn one month per page to add major facts and get consensus updates, which often would be reverted in later weeks. Imagine the bickering if trying to update "Robert E. Lee" to note he carefully freed over 250 slaves by the start of the War, plus he opposed voting by poor whites, not as racist but as elist education or such. Hence, instead of struggling against other users to update a few major pages (perhaps 10 per year and upsetting people's outlook), I instead did the Tyco Brahe thing, like collecting mere celestial data, by fixing over 5,000 minor pages to amass a huge data set. From a future study of patterns in cite data-errors, other cite templates could be developed to autofix cites, with auto-corrected dates and such. Perhaps 70% of cite errors would become invisible, to show a page as free of cite errors, even in older revisions which had not been manually fixed yet.

I come back to Simple WP to freely (re-)write major pages with coherent sources and add the newest sourced research (although wording with the basic vocabulary takes practice). There is less bickering here, and fewer edit-conflicts, as allowing comfortable writing of over 10-20 major pages per month, rather than only 10 shoe-horned consensus updates per year. Once expanded, could advise friends to read the pages here, as coherent concise coverage, not hacked patch-work rants. When a written page was ready, then the update sections could be reworded to copy to other Wikipedias, such as Spanish, French or Italian, to get the key information spread around the world. I think there is less risk here, of political-correctness, which might slant pages far from the original sources or witnesses, as compared to other places where, "You can't say that these days". Just write the plain crucial facts, then take the coherent text to other people who want to read the historic viewpoints, not levels of re-revisionist slants which obscure what really happened in those events. Anyway, thanks again, and I'll try to work here, for awhile with clear, reliable sources. -Wikid77 (talk) 03:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)