Wikipedia:Peer review/Cascade Range/archive1
~Request for mediation and guidance on content and styleSkookum1
Earlier I received a warning concerning my contributions to the Cascade Range, and wish to invite mediation to prevent an unnecessary dispute. Information concerning the Canadian portion of the range was incorrect, and much was missing. Because of the warning I have left one of the last passages unedited, although it contains the error that the Coast Mountains are part of the Cascade Range they are (at least not by Canadian reckoning, and Canada is where they are).
For my clumsy part I was accused of "vandalizing" the Clear Range entry by Adam1213, who perhaps did not understand the context of my efforts. I regret I may have been a little sarcastic with him in response, about free speech and all, but I realize Wikipedia has a system I have yet to learn; I have just been preoccupied writing articles. Forgetting to login in the last few days (so you'd have to use my IP to identify them) I've created several river and range and other articles in British Columbia, and also redefined the Chilcotin page (which formerly went only to its First Nation, the Tsilhqotin) and earlier in the year revised the Lillooet page similarly, as well as those for the Lower Mainland, Vancouver, Whatcom County and nearby areas.
I am open to review on all of what's put in; I've tried to be thorough but I know some of my articles need to be wikified. I'm a contributing editor of the Canadian Mountain Encyclopedia http://bivouac.com and a specialist in the early history of the Pacific Northwest, and thanks to the CME have a pretty good knowledge of all important features that should be entries (and the good taste to know which should not).
I didn't know about the peer review process previously, prior to Adam's warning, but I welcome it. I'm good at editing down other people's writing into readable form, but not always so efficient at it with my own output. I've tried to contribute useful information, but as you can see by this message I'm pretty heavy on the verbiage and can write horribly long sentences that go on forever but could have been easily broken up into only a few . . . .
Lessons in or directions to the various templates and formats and categories etc as used for regions, parks, cities etc would be appreciated. I've made some discussion notes on Chilcotin and certain other pages in the last few days requesting help with formatting (again, I didn't know about peer review; when I get time I'll create peer reviews for them. too.)