Thetabs

Chiwere

Hi, Thetabs. I noticed you undid many of the changes that I and others made to the Chiwere language article since your last edit of it, but didn't give any indication as to your reasons. While it's not required, the normal guideline is to explain your edits in edit summaries, and on the talk page if they might be controversial. I gave my reasons for the changes I implemented in my edit summaries (which can be seen on the page's history tab), as well as on the article's talk page. What was it specifically that you disagreed with? --Miskwito (talk) 22:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Miskwito, thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Currently, I am working on an analysis of the Chiwere language where I must follow certain guidelines and use the formats which correspond with the resources I was assigned. I understand that the IPA format is the form which is most commonly used amongst Linguists and this is something that I discussed with others. I was informed by our Department Chair that I should use the formats which directly correspond with the recourses I use in the analysis. As this project is more than just editing a Wikipedia page, but also assigned by a highly notable partner of the Native American community, I respectfully will abide by these instructions. I do not mean any offense to you or any others who might see this as such. Sincerely, -Tabitha

Hi! Thanks for getting back to me.

I'm a little unclear about exactly what your assignment is. You're supposed to edit Wikipedia to add your research? Or something like that? Obviously, I don't know all the details, but it sounds like your department chair--assuming I'm understanding this correctly; tell me if I'm wrong--isn't really familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines (see here for an overview). Particularly relevant in this case is the policy against including original research (see here). Essentially, you can't use your own research, experience, or analysis of the primary data as a source of information on Wikipedia, and you can't draw conclusions from your sources that aren't actually stated there (see especially WP:SYN). As for the IPA issue, etc., although it's not strictly a requirement, there's certainly a broad consensus among editors on the general form phonological descriptions of languages on Wikipedia should take (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Phonetics/Phonology template).

I don't take offense to your edits or anything, but ultimately you're going to run into trouble if you ignore Wikipedia policies and guidelines, regardless of what your department chair may say. Take care, --Miskwito (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)