User talk:Rosencomet/Archive 1
Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
|
Hello! Mike Ingalls is not the appropriate spot to post information about yourself, because that's the encyclopedic part of the Wikipedia website. User:Rosencomet/Archive 1, however, is available for personal information about yourself. Please see Wikipedia:Introduction and Wikipedia:User page for more information. -- Netsnipe (Talk) 17:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Rosencomet, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
Self-promotion
Please don't use wikipedia for self-promotion. You make Jim cry. It's against the rules of wikipedia. There's also a problem with conflict of interest and imparsiality of your edit. All your edits have been reverted. Thank you. Project2501a 17:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Conflict of Interest
Dear Netsnipe,
First of all, no, I am not Mike Ingalls. I am the director of a group that has hosted appearances by Mike many times over the last 25 years. I was introduced to Wikipedia by someone who had seen a very incorrect listing about one of the events I facilitate, and after posting corrections I noticed that many authors, lecturers, and musicians that I thought were quite worthy of having listings (comparing them to others who were already listed) had no entries. Being the author of our event catalog and having handy short bios on many of these folks, I decided to post the most recent info I had on them as a courtesy. These are not, in my opinion, vanity listings, but actual short biographical sketches of authors and entertainers of interest.
I hope to expand some of the listings and keep them up to date with new data as I receive it, which is usually when I book them next. In a few cases, I've simply added a bit to existing listings, such as an additional college degree, award, or a new book or CD produced.
I don't think I've violated the Wikipedia guidelines. These are professional folks, usually published or with their art/music produced, often internationally celebrated. I'd say Mike Ingalls is near the low end of noteriety among the listings I've posted, It's true, but I haven't finished checking all his credits. He has been a professional classical musician and a paid speaker on a number of subjects, and did record on the album Neandir: Lady of the Flame with Victoria Ganger and Ian Corrigan. He has appeared on television as a performer, and may have more to his credit. I will follow up on it.
In any event, my purpose was to give the Wikipedia community the benefit of my store of short biographical sketches, mostly just a paragraph long. They seemed tailor-made for the purpose, and quite a diverse collection: New Age, Magickal, Counter-Cultural, Art & Music of many types, the Healing Arts, World Spirituality, and more. I will keep an eye to the guidelines, but please be aware of my good intentions, and that I might either expand a somewhat sparse-looking listing within a week of its appearance or encourage the listed person (or someone from a listed group) to update me on their specifics. I'm just trying to be helpful in the spirit of the good work I see being done here.
Ad Astra, Rosencomet Rosencomet 17:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Rosencomet, we've only just realised you're not Mike after going through your log of contributions to Wikipedia and we're very concerned about a conflict of interest here. You are a director of new age festival and creating biographies for all of your guest speakers some of which have been copied and pasted out of your online programme. Since we suspect that no one else would have created these articles otherwise, some editors including myself can only interpret this as an attempt to use Wikipedia to promote your festival by raising its online profile through multiple articles. Patricia Telesco for example will probably deleted because she fails the Wikipedia:Notability (people) guidelines. There are also neutral point of view issues here since it's in your interests to promote these people speaking at your festival instead of writing an impartial biography. Please address our concerns before you continue editing Wikipedia. Other editors will get back to you on this matter shortly, but it's 4am in Sydney right now so I must sleep. Please leave your reply on this talk page. -- Netsnipe (Talk) 18:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Notability requirements
To save yourself a bit of grief, please read Wikipedia's notability requirements for biographies. Published authors are certainly acceptible, but some of the bios you are adding will be deleted sooner or later. Please read the requirements and be more discriminating in your additions... Thanks! —Hanuman Das 18:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Article mention spamming and verifiability
I also note that you are spamming articles, such as Timothy Leary, with mentions of Association for Consciousness Exploration and Starwood Festival. Please note that all additions to Wikipedia must be verifiable. This means that you must be able to provide a book or journal reference (not a web-only one). If you can do that for your additions, fine. If you can't, please desist. —Hanuman Das 18:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Misleading edit summaries
This edit has a misleading edit summary. You added text to the article in addition to the things mentioned. Thus it could in no way be considered a minor edit, which is restricted to grammatical and spelling fixes which do not add or subtract from the content of the article. Using misleading edit summaries is highly discouraged and may lead to conflicts with other editors. —Hanuman Das 18:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your responses
Ok, then. I don't want to bite the newcomer, but rather just make sure that you know what the policies are. Many of your additions are just great and I am glad to see them. On the references to Starwood and ACE, it is ok if there is an existing author bio, say in the back of one of their books that refers to their Starwood participation, but not ok if it isn't verifiable in print. Basicly, the celebrity and their agent get to decide whether they want it called out, unless it should happen to get in the news :-). Also, where it is appropriate, make sure you spell out Association for Consciousness Exploration rather than put ACE, which goes somewhere else! I've fixed it in several location where I thought it was appropriate to leave in. But you would know more than I about sources, so you'll need to decide which artists/authors have self-publicized their involvement and which have only been publicized by the Festival. It's appropriate, I think, to put mentions in the former articles, but not the latter... Hope this makes sense... —Hanuman Das 20:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Question
Are you Jeff Rosenbaum? You have a strange edit history in relationship to that article. Or are you 999 who is always saying he is consulting with you, but you never speak for yourself except in edit histories? There is something very odd going on here, I've started to notice. Maybe you could explain more what is going on regarding you and these various articles you seem to be behind the scenes on that are all related in some way. NLOleson 20:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Response
Well, it's going to be tough, probably impossible, to keep all the articles. Starwood Festival, WinterStar Symposium and Association for Consciousness Exploration are safe I think. On people, please see WP:BIO for policies. The festival organizers will not be notable enough to have their own articles, but you could put a paragraph apiece about them in the ACE article, I suspect. Some of the presenters are not going to make it either: having a book or two published is not always enough to be considered notable by Wikipedia standards.
I've known 999 online for a while, and he is a good guy to help with occult, magick and paganism articles and he's been around enough to know the WP policies and maybe bend 'em a little, but he can't save you from a concerted effort to delete anything non-notable. When you started putting mentions of ACE, SF and WSS into existing articles is what got you noticed. If you hadn't done that, you might have slipped by, but obviously you put something in an article somebody was watching and it made them suspicious of what you were doing.
As for verifiability, it is a pillar of WP. It means you have to provide a reference that someone else can look up, preferably in a book. ACE records aren't going to do it. The web site will be borderline, as both web-only and "autobiographical" sources are considered inferior. You may have to take material out of the articles if you can't point to a printed review, etc. etc. Read WP:V, WP:RS and WP:CITE to understand how important references and citations are. I'll do what I can, but give up on Brushwood Folklore Center, Jeff Rosenbaum, and Joseph Rothenberg; the first looks commercial and the latter two aren't notable by WP standards. With the authors, go to Amazon and start listing a bibliography of all their published books. If they have less than three and/or they are self-published or pamphlets, give up, they'll never pass. I think they have to have at least one book which passes WP:BOOK - reputable published reviews!
You have to think of WP like a paper encyclopedia. If someone is notable enough to have an article in Encyclopedia Brittanica, then no problem putting 'em in WP. But someone who's not published or had multiple mentions in third-party sources isn't going to stay. Sooner or later someone will start a deletion process...
Hope this helps... —Hanuman Das 02:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't understand why you continue to create articles
Reading your talk page I see that lots of people are trying to help you out and enlighten you as to the rules you must follow here at Wikipedia for articles. Yet you continue to create articles on people who are not notable with no effort to provide the required citations. I don't understand what drives you to do this. Surely you can get publicity for your festivals without misusing Wikipedia. I can see by the edit histories that you are very active. Why not concetrate on a few people who are actually notable, rather than go on creating articles on people who will only remain because they slip through the Wikipedia cracks. I would be more than happy to help you out getting your articles together if I didn't feel you are misusing Wikipedia. GBYork 23:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- GBYork, don't you know how to use "user contributions"? Rosencoment hasn't created any new articles recently. If you think otherwise, list them. —Hanuman Das 01:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
That's right. All I've been doing for a while is trying to improve my existing listings and provide discographies and bibliographies and such. And while I'm at it, I'd like to thank 999 and Hanuman Das for their help and patience. I have two jobs and little free time, but I intend to learn to do these entries better; I appreciate the help making my data into real references and citations.Rosencomet 17:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Please don't use Wikipedia to promote your festival
You are taking advantage of the whole hardworking Wikipedia community when you do so. NothingMuch 00:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)