  == Hi, Sgvrfjs ==  Thank you for your very kind message on my talk page. I am also interested in classical music.   I looked at your version of The Wood Nymph before anyone else edited it here and your work-in-progress on The Oceanides in your . As is, both are better than the average English Wikipedia article in writing quality and content.  Wikipedia needs more editors like you.  However, you must understand that at its core Wikipedia is a wiki that is (ideally) written collaboratively. No one owns an article on Wikipedia, no matter how much work an individual put into it. No one can expect their work to remain as first written. Some edits will improve the article, some will make it worse, some are deliberate vandalism (usually infantile rather than malicious)—but usually articles tend to improve over time. Where editors disagree about something in an article, the consensus prevails. An edit is not the equivalent of a teacher, or professor, marking up your paper. Wikipedia's culture does not respect authority, academic degrees, or formal achievements.  English Wikipedia does not prefer any particular variety of the English language, although an article should consistently use the same variety. Wikipedia has a guideline on using and resolving disputes concerning varieties of English.  Wikipedia's style is loosely governed by its own Manual of Style. Some oddities in the Manual of Style reflect deliberate compromises between American English and British English where consistency is desirable. For example, article titles and section headings are capitalized according to  sentence case (as in British English), but titles of English Language works use title case (as in American English). See Manual of Style § Composition titles). Some Wikipedians tend to be sticklers about matters of style; alas, I am one of those. You can avoid conflict over that by spending some time with the Manual of Style. Some Wikipedians tend to be contentions, which is a common problem in online communities; I try not to be  one of those.  You do not need to work on an article in your sandbox until it is a masterpiece, and that also is not the way Wikipedia operates. I suggest that you feed content into The Oceanides and other articles gradually and do your editing directly in the article. In my experience, Wikipedia works best when editors make a lot of bite-size edits, with a descriptive edit summary, rather than in big chunks. But that is just my opinion.  Because of the quality of your work, you should aspire to have articles you care about promoted to Good Article and then to Featured Article. Politically, you improve your chance for promotion by editing collaboratively with others.— 