User talk:Ato679

Welcome!

Hello, Ato679, 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
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Herostratus (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Les Cowley

What is going on with this article? It has been blanked, why? What is objectionable in the article? Herostratus (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{adminhelp}} The page was blanked by a colleague. I had previously inserted a deletion nomination. The biographical entry was made without the subject's knowledge. The contents are not accurate. the contents are disparaging in that they do not present a fai and balanced view of the subject. The subject does not wish a Wikipedia entry that has also migrated to Facebook.

Please realise that the article has been temporarily blanked, pending discussion about it. The contents can be seen in the page history.

You are very welcome to express your views in the discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Cowley.

The discussion will continue for at least seven days, after which the consensus will be evaluated. See Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more details. You may also be interested in the page WP:BLP, the policy regarding such articles. Chzz ► 15:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, actually, no idea why it was blanked, now I checked. So I undid that. Chzz ► 15:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)OK, OK, calm down. A request to delete the article has been filed here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Cowley. However, under normal circumstances this will run for seven days, and the article will exist at least until then. We cannot delete the article at once, because we don't have any proof that you actually speak for the subject. If the article did indeed contain disparaging information, we would remove that information at once, but it doesn't. It just says, basically, the he is a retired professor who wrote a software program. Would you please be kind enough to explain what, exactly, you find so objectionable in the article. Or, actually, it would be better if you do it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Cowley. Please be specific, thanks. Herostratus (talk) 15:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, your saying that "The page was blanked by a colleague" indicates someone else used your account, as it was blanked by someone using this account.

It is absolutely not permitted for more than one person to use an account. See WP:UPOLICY. Chzz ► 15:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(I think it was blanked by an anon.) Herostratus (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was, yes, blanked by IP user here. However, when restored, it was blanked again by Ato679 [1] and [2]. Chzz ► 16:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you like, you can make an appeal to the powers that run Wikipedia om the grounds of "unjustifiable invasion of personal privacy" to have the article removed and its edit history destroyed. Would you like information on how to do that? Herostratus (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{adminhelp}} Please give information on appeal procedures. I am the subject of this article and became aware of it a few days ago. As the subject I am in a strong position to know whether it is accurate, based on reliable sources, disparaging and an intrusion on my privacy. There are many inaccuracies and omissions, the article is disparaging in that by its inacuracy and incompleteness and emphasis it presents a false and unbalanced impression of the subject. Furthermore there are privacy issues that cannot be discussed on a public forum. I am concerned that my attempts to rectify some inaccuracies are repeatedly overridden by administrators who do not know as much about my CV as myself. I am (very) unfamiliar with Wiki editing procedures but have made a best attempt to initiate an orderly deletion nomination and correct misinformation only to see it undone. "The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to BLP subjects who try to fix what they see as errors or unfair material. Although Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves, removal of unsourced or poorly sourced material is acceptable. When an anonymous editor blanks all or part of a BLP, this might be the subject attempting to remove problematic material. Edits like this by subjects should not be treated as vandalism; instead, the subject should be invited to explain his concerns." I have explained my concerns, could I please request that they be respected?

It is difficult to see what is disparaging about the article as it stands; your concerns will absolutely be a factor in the ongoing deletion discussion. As regards possible removal of material in the meantime, as you say it involves discussion of non-public information, please refer to the below - which is a direct copy from the policy page I mentioned, re. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons;

If you are not satisfied with the response of editors and admins to a concern about biographical material about living persons, you can ask the Foundation's team of volunteers for help. Please e-mail info-en-q@wikimedia.org with a link to the article and details of the problem; for more information, see here. See here for how to contact the Wikimedia Foundation itself.

Chzz ► 16:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At first my advice was to accept that, on current showing, the AfD looks as though it is heading for Delete, and just wait a week for it to happen. However, looking back at the article, I see no claim of significance or importance of the subject:just a description of someone who has a PhD and writes software. So I have speedily deleted it. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]