User talk:Ppguitar

Welcome!

Hello, Ppguitar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you created or edited appears to be an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is a common mistake made by new Wikipedians—as this is an encyclopedia, we wouldn't expect to have an article about every contributor. We require individuals to meet Wikipedia's definition of a notable person to accept articles about them.

The page you created about yourself may well be deleted from the encyclopedia. If it is deleted and you wish to retrieve its contents, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page. If your contributions to an existing article about yourself are undone and you wish to add to it, please propose the changes on its talk page.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to 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)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 20:24, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Some stuff about Wikipedia

Hi Ppguitar. It appears from this edit you made to the article Peter Parcek that you might be Parcek himself. If that's the case, then that's OK but there are some things about Wikipedia that you probably want to read to better familiarize yourself with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

The first thing you should do is look at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Relationship between the subject, the article, and Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide because they seem to pertain specifically to your situation. It's important to understand that while Wikipedia has articles written about many subjects, none of these are written for or on behalf of their subjects; in other words, Wikipedia articles aren't owned by their subjects and there's no special editorial control over article content that is granted to the subjects of articles. All content will be assessed in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and sometimes this can mean that the article isn't exactly what the subject may want. There are ways for subjects of articles to seek assistance and their are many editors who work at helping out in this area, but there is a process to follow and the best results are often achieved by following it as closely as possible. The first thing I would suggest doing is to formally declare any conflict of interest that you may have as explained here. Once you do this, editors trying to help you will have a better understanding of who you are and how to best help you. You might also considered following the advice given here and having your identity verified by emailing the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team. You're not required to do this and there can be some risk involved, but doing so will clearly establish beyond a shadow of doubt that you're Peter Parcek and not someone pretending to be him. Such a thing might seem silly, but impersonation on Wikipedia is something that happens more often than you'd think.

I also saw the edit request you made at Talk:Peter Parcek and added an Template:Request edit for it so that it's formally entered into the system. However, I don't think your request has much of a chance of being accepted because it's not really clear as to what you're asking. It's generally not a good idea to post long wordy requests that appear to be nothing more that large block of the article copied-and pasted on the article's talk page. All of the editors reviewing such requests are WP:VOLUNTEERs just like everyone else, and they all work at different paces. Requests like the one you made are often left for the next person to sort out or simply declined outright because there's too much clutter to sort through. There's no harm of course in waiting a bit to see whether some reviewer decides to take it on, but shorter and more-to-the-point requests tend to work better as explained in Wikipedia:Edit requests for future reference. It's almost always easier to get changes made one bit at a time than try to get a major rewriting of the article done. If you have any questions about these things, you can try asking them at the Wikipedia:Teahouse and someone will try and help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Note: The following was originally posted at User talk:Marchjuly#Peter Parcek Edit. It was moved and responded to here to keep everything in one place.

Hi Marchjuly

First of all thank you for taking the time to reach out to me about my edit request. Deeply appreciated. If you celebrate the holidays - Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!

I was not aware that there was something on Wiki w/ me as the subject - when I read it I was chagrined - not because it wasn't what I wanted (although that is true) but because it is riddled w/ inaccuracies, omissions, awkward language & personal data -I wish the author had approached me about (ie: my mother's passing)- my choosing to be a conscientious objector (referred to as "draft dodging") during Vietnam & more. The mention of London never really references the profound musical experiences there & the artists studied first-hand. I am stunned that one author's opinion (however biased, informed or articulated) could be published in such a respected forum, seemingly w/out question. Please forgive - I find the Wiki processes a bit daunting.

Yes I am Peter Parcek. I am 72 w/ lymphoma & would like a fair & impartial assessment as an artist -

What i am requesting is an artistic & informed bio (Please see the All Music biography, Premier Guitar interview, American Blues Scene interview, Glide Magazine review, Rock and Blues Muse review etc) For example I toured & recorded with Pinetop Perkins . I appear on Pine's "On Top" LP originally released on Deluge Records (later reissued). I appeared on radio & in concert w/ Hubert Sumlin. I experienced Skip James in concert at Wesleyan University etc The author of the current bio glosses over or omits most if not all of these (except for being Pine's bandleader which is a misnomer I have attempted to correct) Instead he/she includes work I did for hire as a session musician w/ Miki Singh's pop rock ensemble - which while true, is not at all remotely indicative artistically.

I notice in Kirk Fletcher's bio on Wiki that his "for hire" work is not included, just his artistic statements. I am requesting the same consideration.

The author cites the number of original compositions on Mississippi Suitcase incorrectly (it is three). Moreover there is an editorializing about the cover choices on Suitcase ex. "tries his hand"

In reading the guidelines you kindly pointed me to I came upon this - "editors with a conflict of interest who unilaterally add material tend to violate Wikipedia's content and behavioral policies and guidelines. The content they add is typically unsourced or poorly sourced and often violates the neutral point of view." I am not perceiving the neutral point of view w/ this author's bio either - he/she includes old sources & avoids any of the more recent interviews & assessments from All Music, Glide Magazine, Premier Guitar, American Blues Scene, Rock and Blues Muse etc ( I can get these sources together) I am not requesting a puff piece, just a fair, well-sourced & informed one.

In any event thank you so much for reaching out to me it is sincerely & greatly appreciated.

Where do you recommend I go from here w/ my edit request?

Best, Peter Ppguitar (talk) 01:16, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Peter. You posted the above on my user talk, but I'm going to repond here since it's generally better to keep discussions in one place to avoid confusion and fragmentation. As I posted above, if you have specific concerns about the content of Peter Parcek. Then the place to discuss them would be at Talk:Peter Parcek. Perhaps try tackling what you percieve to be issues one at a time by making an small easily to digest edit requests as explained here. If there's incorrect information in the article, then clearly state what it is and then what you think it should be. Then, provide a citation (e.g. a link) to a reliable source that support's the changes you would like make. Please understand that Wikipedia defines reliable sources in a certain way so it's best to try and suport the claims you want made with such sources and not just make them based on your personal knowlege of things. The editor who created the article is Derek R Bullamore and Derrick is a very experienced and well-established editor. He almost certainly created the article about you because he believe you to meet the criteria for one to be created, not to create some kind of hatchet job. Prior consultation with the subjects of articles in not a requirement for an article to be created, and in many cases it's not even desirable between the goals of the subject and the goals of Wikipedia are usually not only one and the same. However, if you have genuine concerns about the article, then perhaps Derrick will be kind enough to sort them. Please understand that that at this time of year, many Wikipedia editors are busy with other things and Derrick might not be able to respond immediately. Once an article has been created, it's pretty much there for anyone to edit at anytime. There are various automated WP:BOTS as well as human editors who try to keep a watch over things and make sure that things don't get out of hand by people just looking to create a little mischief; there are, however, over six million articles (with more being created daily) and all editors are volunteers. So, sometimes problems go unnoticed for awhile. Wikipedia has fairly strong policies in place when in comes to articles about still living persons, but these aren't always applied as quickly or as evenly and the subjects of articles may want, and in some cases what the subject may want is not really something Wikipedia can do. Once gain, try discussing things on the article's talk page and seeing what other members of the Wikiepdia community may think. The best place to discuss things specific to a particular article is on its corresponding talk page because that keeps everything in one place and makes it much easier for others to participate in the discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:37, 25 December 2021 (UTC)