User talk:Rinorino1947

December 2022

Hello, I'm Manticore. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Banzai Pipeline have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. — Manti core 23:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Manticore,

I am new to Wiki and I read the wizards and tutorials. Please define specifically with objective criteria and principles what about my edit is "inappropriate for an encyclopedia" among Wikipedia published standards as I am only asking for the same guidelines applied to all editors?

I thought my edits would be welcome because Wiki is asking for "additional citations" on this page. Please see the first Wiki paragraphs on the page that say: "This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)...This article possibly contains original research. (June 2018) ...This article needs additional citations for verification. (June 2018)"

I also thought my edits were in the same category as existing accepted edits. The page already references media, especially movies about Pipeline in numerous places. Please see as some examples of which I could use many (but I don't want to belabor the point):

"The name was first used in Bruce Brown's movie Surfing Hollow Days. It also lent its name to a 1963 hit Pipeline by surf music rockers The Chantays."
Footnote13 "Pipe Masters Mens Championship Tour Final Heat". World Surf League. Retrieved 2019-12-20.
"Media[edit]
- The 1974 episode "The Banzai Pipeline" of Hawaii Five-O was filmed at Pipeline.
- The 2002 surfer movie Blue Crush was filmed at Pipe.
- The 2007 film Pipeline featured events at this location.

Rinorino1947 (talk) 00:19, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. The edit that I reverted introduced an external link into the first word in the article. Is there a reason that you did this? Wikipedia is not a collection of external links. The other content that you introduced was in the middle of an existing sentence, rendering the paragraph nonsensical. It's a good idea to use preview and read your own proposed edits before publishing to avoid this happening. — Manti core 01:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Manticore,

Thank you for replying and attempting to clarify why you reverted my edit.

I do not know what you mean by "introduced an external link into the first word in the article." I believe I never edited the first word in the article. When I browse “View history,” I cannot find anything I did to the first word. In fact, the first word of the one sentence I did submit to the article does not have an external link either. If you saw that I did do this, I apologize in advance for my inadvertent error and ask if you will please send me the error so I may be more aware of not committing the error again?

I also do not know what you mean by “the other content that you introduced was in the middle of an existing sentence.“ I merely introduced one full sentence, made more edits to it, and did not modify any prior existing sentence. Again, when I browse “View history,” I cannot find anything related your claim. If you saw that I did, I apologize again for my inadvertent error and ask if you will please send me the error so I may be more aware of not committing the error again?

Maybe you are moderating another Wikipage and confused my simple one sentence edit with another project on which you are working?

My intent of my edit is to continue the thread in the “Surfer” section about the first “credited” surfers at Pipeline. I would think a documentary with raw video made at the time that Wiki claims the first Pipeline surfers is a good way to submit evidence. If you do consider the topic of my submitted sentence to be “rendering the paragraph nonsensical,” I am wondering whether you consider the entire article nonsensical. For example just in the “Surfers” section, the first paragraph is riddled with references to how dangerous the Pipeline wave is and its bathymetric and geomorphic character rather than information exclusively about Pipeline surfers. Would you give me permission to edit these bits of information into a new section to this article about the bathymetric and geomorphic aspect of Pipeline or are you fine with this sort of flow?

Alternatively, is your main issue with my edit the placing of supporting media in the section body or cited by external link? If external link, I am happy to place that citation in a footnote (like the prior Wiki-accepted sentence to support the crux of its dubious claim that Phil Edwards is the “first person to surf” Pipeline) rather than an external link. Under either standard (media references or external links) or your topic standard, the entire article is inconsistent and needs a lot of tightening to these standards.

I also don’t understand your earlier explanation “one or more external links you added to Banzai Pipeline have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia.“ Later, you explained “Wikipedia is not a collection of external links.” I will admit, I did cite another internet-based encyclopedia (IMDb) with an external link in my one sentence edit. Surely, it is not Wikipedia’s policy to only except self-referential Wikipage citations for new content. By definition, you would revert all new content to Wikipedia. Does Wikipedia have a specific rule about using IMDb in citations?

As a former professional editor, I will admit that I and, I believe, we all struggle with communicating more constructively and clearly. May I suggest that in the future you try to encourage fledgling Wikipedia editors by avoiding use of bombastic words of criticism such as "nonsensical" rather than, for example, using the word "confusing" with a constructive suggestion that perhaps the information submitted might work better in a different section. Would the "Media" section be an appropriate section for my submission perhaps in the same bullet format as the existing format? Rinorino1947 (talk) 08:35, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. If you click the link I sent above - copied here for convenience - you will see an overview of the edit you made, that I reverted. You have inserted an external link in the word "the" which opens the article. On the same overview, if you scroll down to read the surfers section, you will see what I mean about the paragraph not making sense after your edit. You do not need my permission to edit this article. But if you are new to editing Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to practice in the Wikipedia:Sandbox, or to ask for editing assistance at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. — Manti core 09:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Manticore,

Thank you for directing me to that link. Now I see what you are speaking about. That looks like a significant problem and I apologize for inadvertently doing that. I didn't see that on this Wiki page of View history: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1128220462&oldid=1127661672&title=Banzai_Pipeline I don't think I would have seen it even if it was available to see on View history as I never had any intent to add an edit to the first part of this article and my eyes never returned to that first section of the page after I made the edit to the "Surfers" section lower down.

I appreciate that you said "You do not need my permission to edit this article." But I don't want you to recommend that I be punished while I'm just starting out as a new Wiki editor. What I am really asking is whether you reverting all my edits was a blanket reaction to the mistake at the first word of the article and you are really OK with restoring the only edit I did intend, which was in the "Surfers" section much lower in the article. Are there issues with that one sentence? Will it be considered disrespecting Wikipedia and your efforts to make a presentable encyclopedia to restore that sentence?

The reasons I believe my edit in the "Surfer" section should be allowed are explained in my previous reply. In addition, to support my explanation that the placement of an external link at the start of the article was totally inadvertent is that I first added the one sentence edit (in 2 simple edits) to the "Surfer's" section. I don't think you have explained any issues with that one intentional sentence in the Surfer's section. Hours later, I went back to add a few surfer names and more citations (external links and footnotes) to the Surfer's section to support that one sentence. Can you see time stamps to support this? This is where I was trying to insert the "Catri" link that you found in the first word of the article so this error may have happened in that return edit hours later. Since I made other edits at that time, it is odd I cannot see them in the link you sent or in View history. I'm wondering if these other edits reside somewhere else or if you deleted them? I can see, though, that you (or another editor?) removed the last bulleted line in the Media section. Why can I see this but not your editing of all of my submissions in the Surfer section? Rinorino1947 (talk) 21:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]