Benwebboz

G'day there, I am part of the St Johns Wood History Group. Our current project is to build the St Johns Wood Wiki site, as it has a rich and diverse history. We are very proud to be able to improve the quality rating from its initial STUB to its current B rating.

We acknowledge everyone who contributes information to the site and to those who edit or wikify it to make us look good!

My skills are developing so thanks to those editors who are patient with me and explain things in a gentle manner with links so I can learn more.

Enjoy the journey!

Links for me to use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LEAD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_templates

Great work on St Johns Wood

	Australian Barnstar of National Merit
	Congratulations on the extensive work you have done on St Johns Wood, Queensland and related articles! Kerry (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

The Barnstar of National Merit may be awarded to a user who contributes significantly to expand or improve Wikipedia's coverage of any given country.

My thoughts about quality in Wikipedia

In terms of the Wikipedia debate on deletionism and inclusionism, I'm probably more inclined to inclusionism. I feel that if someone takes the trouble to contribute material to Wikipedia in good faith (including that they have no conflict of interest in relation to the topic), then they would not do that unless they thought others might find it useful. If we want Wikipedia to be "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" (as it says on the Wikipedia main page), we must understand that "anyone" encompasses a massive range of abilities when it comes to writing. And for new/occasional contributors, it isn't realistic to assume that they know the Manual of Style inside-and-out. Yes, overall we want to strive towards quality, but we cannot always expect to start with quality. I think deleting good faith contributions on the grounds of quality will only offend the contributor and makes them less likely to contribute in future.