This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
The recent revisions to the article have helped to fill out content and context, but they've also removed the few inline references that were there, as well as Hamill's quotes, and some unpleasant family history (earlier version: [1]). Major revisions made to a biography of a living person without references, explanation, or discussion are reasons for scrutiny. 99.168.85.28 (talk) 15:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed Chekhov61's troubling comment in the article, that all the information was written and approved by Mr. Hamill [2]. Whether the account belongs to Mr. Hamill (in which case, I am an admirer), or a family member or friend, WP:COI is a real concern. A subject may use the article talk page to discuss inaccuracies, or delete libelous material, but writing and 'approving' one's own biography falls afoul of neutrality guidelines. 99.168.85.28 (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've been in touch with Pete Hammill, who was unaware of Wikipedia's guidelines when he offered his biography. I've attempted to reconfigure his essay (one hopes there is a merciful god for such copyediting) and added numerous sources. 99.149.87.151 (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given my most recent contributions here [3], and the possibility that I misunderstand guidelines, I'd appreciate feedback on the current version of this article, and welcome a rollback to the better-written version submitted by Mr. Hamill [4]. 99.155.206.229 (talk) 13:49, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You've got to be kidding. The version you highlight is absolutely dreadful to even look at. Maybe there is some substance in there that's worth something, but there are no sources for any of it, and my particular favorite under References is: "All the information in this biography was written and approved by Pete Hamill." You don't get to write your biography on Wikipedia, and neither does Hamill. If you want to make some suggestions as to how to improve the current version of the article, please feel free. Why don't you take some time and read about Wikipedia and how it works? If you don't want to spend your time doing that, then don't spend your time "contributing". Also, you have a registered account. Why don't you use it?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
