Talk:Social capital/Archives/2015
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Bellagio99 revert of LeoRomero edits
@Bellagio99: I am about to undo your unexplained deletion (diff) of definitions used by Sanders/HarvardKS. Please do not undo my revert. Let's talk about your deletion here. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- I though it was WP:Undue, to say the least. If necessary, why not put it towards the end, in chronological order? It's not a really new revelation. PS: Wish rollback allowed for commentary, so I apologize for that. Bellagio99 (talk) 23:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
No worries Bellagio99. Glad you brought up rollback commentaries. That's one more reason to "improve not revert": in addition to doing instead of saying, we have the benefit of explaining what we did. And that's a HUGE deal, esp to the newbies and experts we've been trying to attract and retain. Had I not been an old-timer, had I been a know-it-all-newbie instead, I might have gotten into an Edit Bore with you, then quit Wikipedia in disgust. That's if I'd even realized that you undid all my work - I might have missed that, since you tagged your revert as "minor".
Cruel-and-unusual, making me read WP:UNDUE. I don't think you're citing the best applicable law, but don't blame you - we have waaaaaay too many rules. Re "not a revelation": it's the first time this source was cited, and they're kinda the guys who made SC a thing again. Re "chronological order" - this Social capital article has no order - four separate sections that cross-talk about background, roots, definitions, and measurements, for one thing. I'd fix it, but am already overcommitted on Community (which was flagged as overlong - and it's less than half this mess :). - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 02:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
- LeoRomero Methinks social capital has been a continuing thing since way before this -- Jim Coleman, for example -- and Wellman's "Community Question" traces it to well before WW2. However, glad others are now using it. I agree the article is a mess, and like you I am too swamped on other things to do much except patrol. Good luck with Community - I haven't looked but there are so many different usages of that. Bellagio99 (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
@Bellagio99: I noted you and your point re WP:UNDUE in my conversation with Tom Sander and other subject experts, flagged the article to get help from organized minds, and asked some other friends to help improve this article. ( So I can focus on Community :). - Thanks again; LeoRomero (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2015 (UTC) https://twitter.com/LeoRomero/status/671039832567738368