User talk:Oakland.dan.williams

February 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Oakland Technical High School. Giving you a final warning as I am sure you are Otwebmaster, who has been warned repeatedly about unreferenced additions John from Idegon (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, "Oakland Dan". Thanks for your interest in the Oakland Tech article. As you can see, several people have objected to your additions. You probably don't understand what is being asked for, or why your additions are being deleted. There are two issues. One is that we do not list anyone as an alum unless they already have an article at Wikipedia. So don't add anyone to the list unless they have an article that can be linked to. The other issue is that we need verification that the person is actually an alum of this school. That is usually done via a reference at the person's Wikipedia article. I would suggest you hold off for a few days, and let me see what I can do to provide the references or verification that is required. If I am able to find verification for the names that have been deleted, I will add it and restore the names. --MelanieN (talk) 09:54, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

You just re-added two of them - Jack Hayford and Antonia Brico. I have deleted them, and I SERIOUSLY warn you not to add them again. The reason I deleted them is that I could not find any evidence in online sources that they attended Tech, and without such evidence we cannot list them. In Brico's case, I also could not find any evidence anywhere for that alternate name - not even in her entry in Encyclopaedia Brittanica. It may very well be true that these people attended Tech, but we need to verify it by independent reliable sources or else we cannot include it here.

If you add them again you will be edit warring, which can get you blocked from editing. So DO NOT re-add them. --MelanieN (talk) 18:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Oakland.dan.williams. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Oakland Technical High School, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
• instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 18:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Oakland Technical High School. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Chrisw80 (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Well done!

Congratulations! You found the necessary citations for Antonia Brico and Jack Hayford, and you added them to the article with properly formatted citations. That is what has been needed. I will make sure the information also gets into their Wikipedia articles. --MelanieN (talk) 23:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Wow, and you did that too! (added it to the people's articles) Very good, you are well on your way to becoming a full-fledged Wikipedian! --MelanieN (talk) 23:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Oops, you're going to have to find better sources for Bechtel and for Ron Williams. You used Oakland Wiki for Bechtel and the German Wikipedia for Williams, but wikis are not regarded as Reliable Sources. Because they are things that anyone can edit, their information is not regarded as verified or reliable. I spent a little time looking for something to connect Bechtel to the school, but so far I haven't found anything. So, you are learning! You need to have sources, but they have to be Reliable Sources as Wikipedia defines them. As for Williams, I did find something linking him to Tech, but we can't list him because he does not have an article at the English Wikipedia. There are lots of people here named Ron Williams, see Ron Williams (disambiguation), but none of them seem to be the same person as the Tech graduate in the German Wikipedia. So I am going to remove those two from the list for now; if you can find a Reliable Source on Bechtel he could be re-added. Sorry about all these rules! But you are determined and you are learning, and I feel sure you will continue to make constructive contributions here. --MelanieN (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the direction, MelanieN. As you may have guessed, I am the person that maintains Oakland Tech's online Historical Archive, and all of the information related to these individuals that I'm trying to add was found either in school yearbooks, or was obtained directly from the individuals themselves via interviews or surveys. So how do I convert this factual data that I have into a "Reliable Source" that can be used to add them to the Notable Alumni list? Or do their entries in the Tech historical archive qualify (e.g., Stephen Bechtel or Ron Williams - and I also have an email conversation with Ron Williams)? If not, how do I create a Reliable Source with the physical data I have to prove that they went to Tech? And out of curiosity, why are some alumni listed on other high school pages allowed without Reliable Sources (e.g., Berkeley High School, James_Madison_High_School_(Brooklyn))? Thanks again for your help. --Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 04:41, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Also, does this not qualify as a reliable source for Ron Williams http://www.ron-williams.de/biographie.html? --Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 05:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting here, Dan! (One of the problems that other editors had with you, was the fact that you weren't communicating, either here or on the article's talk page. But I realized that people new to Wikipedia often don't know how to communicate with others here.) I figured you must have access to some kind of school archive, from the fact that you knew their year of graduation. I'm a Technite too, by the way; see my user page.
So, about Reliable Sources. The basic guidelines are at WP:RS. In particular, see WP:WPNOTRS. Wikipedia frowns on "primary sources" (such as the person themselves) and doesn't allow "original research" at all. You can't use information you get from the individual; in the first place it is primary, and in the second place, Wikipedia has no way of verifying the information. I realize this is counter-intuitive but it actually does make sense. I once had to remove a person's birthplace from an article because she had told me it herself, but when it was challenged I had no "reliable source" to verify it. If I had said "she told me so herself," that would not have verified anything, because who knows if I am a reliable reporter? I'm just another anonymous editor here. This may seem crazy, but it's actually very important. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which means it only repeats what other, earlier sources have published, and to maintain Wikipedia's reputation for accuracy, those sources must be credible.
How to apply this to the particular sources you are using? In my opinion the archive pages, based on school yearbooks, are credible sources to establish the fact that they went to Tech. I already accepted one of those archive pages for Jack Hayford. Brico was trickier because of the name change, but you found sources for that. I would accept the school archive for Bechtel etc. A person's own website is less credible (in any case Ron Williams's webpage does not say he went to Tech), and we never accept things like Facebook or Twitter as sources. Likewise we don't accept Wikipedia pages or any wikis, because we have no idea if the information is accurate or not; "Anyone can edit", as they say.
The other main criterion to be listed as "notable alumni" (in addition to verifiability) is notability. We judge notability by whether they have received significant coverage from independent reliable sources. Things like the Tech archive would not count toward notability; only independent sources count for notability. But you don't have to worry about that for your purposes. If they have an article here you can take that as evidence that they are notable, and all you need to do is verify that they went to Tech. Note that Ron Williams fails the "notability" test because he does not have an article in the English Wikipedia, so he can't be listed no matter what kind of source you provide.
Finally, where to put the reference? You notice that most of the alumni do not have a reference at the school article, and most schools do not have individual references for each alum. For lists like "notable alumni," the usual way to reference it is to put the information into the person's article, as you did for Hayford and Brico. Bottom line, the two things that are required are 1) the person already has an article here in the English Wikipedia and 2) that article states, supported by a reference, that the person attended the school.
Make sense? Ask if you have further questions. You can ask here on your user talk page; I will see it.--MelanieN (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Hey, see if you can find a source that Nell Irvin Painter, class of '59, attended Tech! --MelanieN (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Go Bulldogs, MelanieN! Thanks for the additional information; the rules around wiki editing are much clearer to me now. And just so it's crystal clear, would it be accurate to modify your "Bottom Line" to this: "...the two things that are required are 1) the person already has an article here in the English Wikipedia and 2) that article states, supported by a reference to a "Reliable Source" which can not be a "self-published" source (e.g., Ron Williams' own website) that the person attended the school."? So for each person I would like to add to Tech's Notable Alumni list that doesn't already have a wikipedia article, I could simply create a wikipedia article, and cite their OT archive page/entry as the reliable, published source that they went to Tech? And for the Ron Williams situation, that does seem a bit odd to me. Seems like wikipedia is wikipedia, whether it's in English or German? Could I just do a google translate of his German wiki and create an English wiki with it, adding the reference to his OT archive entry to show he went to Tech? I now understand why Ron's own site can't be used as the "reliable source", but this page actually does say that he went to Tech, about halfway down at the start of the "English Biography" section: http://www.ron-williams.de/biographie.html -- Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, no, not exactly. You can't "simply create a Wikipedia article" about just anybody. They have to meet the notability guidelines of WP:GNG and WP:BIO. You shouldn't even think about creating an article until you know how you are going to support it with significant coverage from independent reliable sources. And no, Wikipedia isn't necessarily Wikipedia. Each different language Wikipedia has its own community which creates its own rules. (Remember, Wikipedia is created entirely by volunteers; there is no "central command".) The German Wikipedia has different rules and doesn't require that kind of sourcing, so I don't know if a translation would pass muster or not; I don't see that kind of coverage in the existing de.wiki article. I'm not terrible familiar with the requirements for musicians and actors. But you don't want to get a reputation for creating inappropriate articles. So here's what you can do: create a draft, in your own private user space, where you can take your time and develop the article. The draft could be called User:Oakland.dan.willilams/Ron Williams; just click on this redlink to get it started. The draft could start out as a translation of the de.wiki article and then you could tweak it as necessary. However, Google Translate does a lousy job of translating; you could start out with a Google translation but it would have to be corrected and modified by someone who knows German. BTW There are some sources about him available in English. In a quick search I found a news article [1], a book mention [2], and a couple of online mentions whose reliability I can't judge. [3][4] There is a real possibility that he could pass the "notability" criteria, even though he is better known in Germany than he is here. But you do need to take heed of the warning you got about WP:COI. If Ron Williams is related to you, as your name and your eagerness to include him would suggest, you should not be writing articles about him. You can find lots of advice at Wikipedia:Your first article. When you think you have it ready for the main encyclopedia, ask someone to take a look at it and comment. If they think it has a chance of being accepted you can move it into the encyclopedia; without advice it could get deleted so fast it would make your head spin. You will also need advice about what to call the article, because the title Ron Williams is already taken. Meanwhile, you know what to do about people who already have articles: just add the information about Tech to their existing article, with a reference, and then they can be listed as notable alumni. --MelanieN (talk) 22:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Ha! No, Ron and I are not related, as you would see if you had a photo of each of us. I'll follow your advice to create an English Ron Williams page, if I can find a couple days free! Thanks again for your help. -- Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 00:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael B. Sutton (March 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Michael B. Sutton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Oakland.dan.williams, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 TT me 00:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Howard Christie (March 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Howard Christie and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:23, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Howard Christie (March 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RadioFan was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Howard Christie and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

RadioFan (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Dan! I took did some searching about this person, to see if I could find any sources to make him meet our notability criteria, but I really couldn't find anything. People don't generally get articles based on college football careers (they pretty much have to have played for a major pro team, see WP:NGRIDIRON). We don't seem to have definite guidelines for movie producers, unlike WP:ACTOR and WP:DIRECTOR. So he would have to meet the regular criteria at WP:GNG and WP:BIO. It seems like he just doesn't have the required significant coverage. Sorry, and thanks for trying. --MelanieN (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Melanie. Thanks for the ongoing information and training! Regarding Howard Christie's notable-ness, in the College Athletes section of the Notability page, it states that a college athlete is notable if they "Have won a national award (such as those listed in Template:College Football Awards or the equivalent in another sport), or established a major Division I (NCAA) record." Being named to the All-American team, which Christie accomplished in 1933, is listed as one of those awards. And the Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers is "dedicated to building comprehensive and detailed articles for actors and filmmakers." (I think Producer should qualifie as "filmmaker", no?), and one of the Goals is listed is "To standardize Wikipedia articles on film actors, film directors, film producers, screenwriters, cinematographers, film editors, and score composers." And one last bit of continued confusion for me is how other people with similar or fewer accomplishments has been approved (Gilbert Adler, Nat Levine, William LeBaron, Paul Jones (film producer), Stephanie Austin, and many others)? Do I need to include his Filmography? thx. Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 20:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC) P.S. Is this the correct way to respond to your comment?

Yes, this is the correct way to respond. (As long as you sign your comment, it hardly matters how you format it!) I was not aware of that "All American" guideline; he was third-team for the North American Newspaper Alliance all-star team; I'll ask someone if that qualifies. (The NANA is not listed at College Football All-America Team but that may be just because it is no longer active.) As for Producer (I believe that is not the same as Filmmaker, which usually means Director), I'll try to get more information about the guidelines. But he was certainly producer of some notable TV series and movies; your references definitely show that he was producer for all 8 years of Wagon Train, and for Abbott and Costello movies. I'll work on it, maybe tomorrow when I have more time. Meanwhile, don't fall into the trap of arguing WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS; that gets you nowhere. --MelanieN (talk) 23:49, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't actually arguing that Christie should be allowed simply because all of the other similarly-accomplished film producers existed. I was curious as to why entries existed for so many other similarly-accomplished film producers, people who appeared to have no other basis for notability other than being a film producer, and I guess the answer is that none of them have been reviewed. I assumed that since there are so many of them (several hundred, based on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=100&offset=0&profile=default&search=american+film+producer), that at least some of them had to have been reviewed and approved. Oh well. Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 01:55, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I have asked for guidance about producers, because I really don't know what the rules are. As for the All American designation, that may not be enough; see Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#Question about WP:NCOLLATH. --MelanieN (talk) 03:56, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

And as for the articles you tagged, I checked a couple, and they would certainly not be accepted now; they have no references except IMDb; but they were created in 2006 or 2008 when there was no formal reviewing system, and they have simply lurked under the radar since then. Sadly, there are a lot of older articles here that don't belong here, but nobody has bothered to tag them or nominate them for deletion. William LeBaron is different, because he was the producer of a movie which won the Academy Award for Best Picture; I think that would make his article a gimme, because the "Best Picture" award is actually presented to the producer. --MelanieN (talk) 04:09, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

IMPORTANT: I just noticed that a large part of the article appears to be copied directly from the school archive. That is absolutely not allowed here; see WP:COPYVIO. You need to immediately rewrite the article (not just close-paraphrase, but rewrite) so that it is not copied from the source. I know what you are going to say: it's OK, the school doesn't mind, you wrote the other thing yourself, whatever. None of that matters. If it has been published anywhere, even on a school website, we can't copy it. Wikipedia is very strict that they WILL NOT use material which is copied from another source, unless that source is specifically in the public domain. I really should delete the article as a copyright violation, but I will give you a day or two to rewrite it. --MelanieN (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I just did a partial rewrite of the first section to show you what I mean. --MelanieN (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Done! Oakland.dan.williams (talk) 16:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

OK, that's better. I'm thinking that the combination of Wagon Train (for which he was entirely responsible for its whole 8-year run) and the movies may be enough for notability, but I am asking for guidance in a couple of places. If we get back an opinion that he deserves an article, I would suggest you add the filmography as you suggested before re-submitting it. It would look more impressive laid out in a decades-long list, rather than compressing everything into a sentence or two. --MelanieN (talk) 16:46, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

The guidance I'm getting so far isn't terribly encouraging. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Notability of producers. But let's continue to see what we can do for sourcing. I added an obituary from the LA Times; that's a start toward providing Independent Reliable Coverage about him. It can be hard to find coverage about people who were active in the pre-internet age. --MelanieN (talk) 21:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

The people at the WikiProject Film discussion suggested a couple of places to look for coverage. --MelanieN (talk) 20:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Howard Christie has been accepted

Howard Christie, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:40, 2 December 2016 (UTC)