Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:20, 21 September 2006

Hello TimidGuy and welcome to Misplaced Pages. On your user page you indicate that you've come here for the purpose of working on the Transcendental Meditation article. It may help if you read the Misplaced Pages page on WP:SPA single purpose accounts. People who join the Wiki community for the purpose of editing one article or articles on only one issue often are not regarded as seriously as editors who work on articles from a variety of subjects. Edits and comments made by SPA users are often not respected as highly as those from editors who work on articles in a variety of subjects. The best way for a newbie SPA editor to gain respect and support from the community is to contribute to Misplaced Pages in more than the one subject for which he/she joined. With that said, welcome and happy editing. Askolnick 18:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I took a look at the oldest version of the Transcendental Meditation article, which you say you wrote and gave to an (apparently anonymous) editor, who put it up. The article reads like an advertisement for Transcendental Meditation. Even worse, it was entirely unsourced. Not one statement was attributed to areputable source that readers could check. There is no way that the article could have been left like that and not be completely rewritten. In addition, that article defined only one meaning of TM - the basic meditation technique that the movement teaches to initiates. But TM is far more than that. It's a moderately large organization, which some authorities consider to be a cult. It is also a registered trademarked name of a large variety of products and services, including the Transcendental Meditation-Sidhi technique and program. An article titled "Transcendental Meditation" therefore needs to address all its associated meanings - not just one. Wiki editors would never leave an article on "Honda" which only discusses motorcycles. As for having criticisms that are not "answered," "answering" criticisms is not the role of Wiki editors. Their job is to include the most important facts and opinions they can find. If they find "answers" to critisms in a reputable source (see WP:RS), they may included them. But bear in mind that all facts and opinions (except those that are well-known to most people - ie. sun rises in the east, sets in the west), must be backed up by citing a reputable source. Adding unsourced material is called "original research" and is not allowed in Misplaced Pages. I hope this information explains why the TM article is so different from what you asked an editor to put up. I also hope this information will help make your future contributions to Misplaced Pages easier and more rewarding.

However, keep in mind. As the article's history and the templates on top of the article indicate, it is a highly contentious article. You say that you are shy and "don't have the stomach for slugging it out on the discussion page." But that's exactly what is necessary when editing such contentious articles. Simply making changes in a hotly fought over article will often just be removed. If those changes are put back without sufficient discussion, it may likely lead to an edit war. This is not a good way for a Wiki editor to start. Perhaps you might consider first working on some other articles of interest to you, which are not so contentious. This will give you experience to help you avoid making errors that could lead to angry responses and disruption. Heaven knows there's too much of this already in Misplaced Pages, with this article seeing more than its share. Askolnick 19:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks much, Askolnick. I'd been hoping someone would appear on my Talk page. I didn't know about SPA, but at this point it's my only option. Thanks for letting me know. I did know about the need to make comments on the discussion page to justify changes to the article. And I very much want to avoid edit warring. I also understand about no original research and citing reputable sources. But I do appreciate your pointing it out, and any other guidance you can give.

I agree that the original entry was inappropriate the way it was approached. (It was fairly early in the days of Misplaced Pages.) My point wasn't that it was good, but simply wanted to say that our intention was to have an entry just about Transcendental Meditation.

I've been involved with the organization that teaches Transcendental Meditation for 32 years and understand all its facets. But I've never heard anyone use TM the way you do, both within and outside the organization. Yikes, I don't want to get into it now, but as I understand it, Transcendental Meditation, as a registered trademark, refers to a very specific technique for meditation and isn't "the registered name of a large variety of products and services." Each of those has its own service mark. I do want to take this up soon on the Discussion page, in part to question the correctness of the sentence in the first paragraph of the article that says " is also the name of a movement led by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi."

In any case, your tone here is so much kinder than in the discussion. I appreciate it. TimidGuy 21:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

TG, I really welcome your contributions and discussions. Misplaced Pages needs good editors from all sides of the issues covered in its articles. While very close involvement with an issue can give an editor a great advantage, it can also seriously impair his or her editorial judgement. Such involvement gives them hard-to-recognize and control biases as well as first-hand knowledge. Like you, I have had personal involvement with the TM organization. As a trained science journalist, I have learned to recognize and control my emotional baggage (for the most part) when writing articles. That doesn't mean I never make mistakes, which is why it's good to have people like you (and even Sparaig) working on the TM article. But keep in mind that I have been compared with a bulldog who sinks his teeth into a fact and will not let go. The harder anyone tries to get rid of that fact, the harder I chomp. In other words, I'm no timid guy. You said you agree with my suggestion to work on adding new material rather than deleting or changing other editors' contributions, at least until you gain more experience. I do think this is a good idea. You will discover that it's generally easier to get new material accepted than it is to remove or change the work of other editors. That doesn't mean you may not find resistance, but it's only natural that editors want to protect the fruit of their hard work. I, for one, am reluctant to accept any change, unless it improves the article. One mistake many single purpose editors make is to try to achieve "balance" by removing or obfuscating points they don't like. If they want more balance they should leave accurate and well-sourced information alone and provide accurate and well-sourced information that they believe will add more balance. So have a good respite and see you back soon. Askolnick 12:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)