Here follows a reply that's a bit long, and heavy -- 'ton of bricks' like -- but if it sounds too much like a rant, then I want to say immediately
that the thoughts here are largely general thoughts, and aren't only specifically about the Fairies article or your edits.
This is a reply written from my perspective on tinWiki article creating and editing, which isn't a perspective I expect everybody else has, and so I
absolutely both understand and really expect it if you consider that not everything I say makes sense... I also speak from thoughts that I've had
about other edits in the past, and so, then, much of what I say here is general thoughts, and not only directed towards you personally or your
contributions now to the Fairies article.
So, then, I'd say that some of the editing you did is something I might have perhaps done differently. The Fairies article did have the Fix banner on
it, which means the article was considered to have some kind of problem or other. There's a lot more content in the article now, but some of the
changes were perhaps a bit 'much'. (You'll also see comments in the article discussion there, which I wrote before coming here to this thread.) I
realized only after looking at your signature here now that you are probably the owner of Atlantic Photography. Sorry about the leg and the theft, if
so. So that means the new image isn't a breach of the copyright of that website's owner, or so I assume.
I still got a couple of concerns, though. When editing an article, my view is that the existing article should be adjusted and added to, not replaced
entirely, which it seems happened here. Not least the image that was in the article would probably have been nice to keep, since it was offered for
use on tinWiki by the artist, ATS member Zaimless from the ATS Art forum. Deletions, text especially, should, in my personal opinion, always be
accompanied by some kind of comment given in the article discussion. Other users may wonder why the content was removed, and the user(s) who wrote
that content may be particularly interested in knowing why it was removed. Remember that tinWiki is an information site, and removing information is
therefore a fairly special act; it's also a collaborative site, which means that communication and offering information on what's going on, is also
of special importance.
It seems the new article text is based largely on this
article, with a few verbatim pastes, as
well, which might not be entirely acceptable by the )owner
there, where it also says very clearly that
she doesn't allow reproduction of the text, unless a written permission is given.
Minor style and formatting comments: every article should have an introduction, which is a paragraph or two appearing before the first header, to give
a summary or 'compact' presentation of that which is the topic of the article. Also, I assume that an encyclopedic writing style means that
sentences should always be full sentences, and not begin in the header and continue under it. If the header formatting of the first word in the
article was simply removed, the introduction would be quite good, immediately, since the article text's beginning is a good introduction text. As for
the header formatting in itself, it should use two equal signs on each side, not just one, for the highest level header used inside the article