User talk:Dharris1844

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! Nancy talk  13:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Articles for deletion nomination of Andy Scott Harris
I have nominated Andy Scott Harris, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Andy Scott Harris. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nancy talk  13:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Nancy talk  17:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

ANI
I have reported your misconduct at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
It appears that Andy Scott Harris is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. That's no slight; most of us aren't. It's also a reasonable mistake for a new editor to make. Wikipedia's notability guidelines are "public" but they aren't always "user friendly" to access for the public who are new to editing. (The stuff above the edit-box when you edit or start an article links to the right spots.) I personally feel the above report of "misconduct" was not appropriate to the situation, as Wikipedia tries to uphold a guideline called Assume good faith, that is, to assume the user's mistake is not misconduct unless there's good reason otherwise. I can also see how what happened in the AfD (Article for Deletion) could be frustrating and off-putting, and ultimately give you a negative image of Wikipedia as a whole. I'm sorry for that, but I'll ask you to try to "assume good faith" on our part as well (or at least realise that we make mistakes). People sometimes take for granted that everyone they're dealing with should know the inner workings of the site. As for the "manifold rules" and "policing" (both of which are sometimes accurate), with a site this large, some sort of bureaucracy is needed to keep it from falling apart or exploding. As for Andy, he's 11, he has many years ahead to become notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. Good luck. - BalthCat (talk) 08:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * p.s. Here's those manifold rules... In the future, to avoid conflict of interest, please contact an editor who is independent of Andy and ask them if they would be willing to start an article, make appropriate edits, or direct you to an editor who is willing/has time. This avoids conflict of interest, and the editor will likely be more familiar with notability guidelines and other Wikipedia standards. - BalthCat (talk) 08:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I would like to echo BalthCat's comments. I logged in this morning and was frankly horrified to see the treatment that you have been subjected to from certain users. I feel partially responsible for this, not because I nominated the article for deletion but because, in the interests of a balanced debate I encouraged you to participate in the deletion debate which seems to have resulted in you being on the receiving end of some pretty awful behaviour. There a few editors here who don't have the maturity to understand that people can disagree (sometimes strongly) but still keep the debate cordial, respectful and non-confrontational. I'm so sorry about the way you have been treated and I truly hope that that you will not be discouraged from continuing to contribute to the project. Kind regards, Nancy  talk  09:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I would also encourage you to continue to contribute to Wikipedia, but would urge you to avoid making any edits on articles regarding members of your family or your personal business interests. Racepacket (talk) 13:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Personal Information on your Userpage
Hi Dharris1844. My name is Backslash Forwardslash. I am a Wikipedia administrator, and I noticed you have recently created a userpage. I don't intend to scare you away or attempt to intimidate you, but I thought you might want to reconsider some of the items on your userpage. You may have not realised that the items on your userpage release personal information about yourself (real name or age etc), which could be used against you in the future. While 99% of all the editors on Wikipedia are friendly, welcoming and harmless, there is a chance your personal information could be misused by editors not so 'high-minded'. A handful of editors have even felt real-world implications due to their Wikipedia edits and release of personal information.

Protecting your privacy, and remaining anonymous while on the internet — on any site — is a good idea. The internet is a worldwide and largely unregulated medium, and while Wikipedia is one of the safer sites, there are definite risks while online. With cyber-bullying and cyberstalking becoming increasingly commonplace, it is important that you take every precaution to remain safe.

I have deleted some revisions of your userpage in respect to your privacy for the time being, just in case you wish to reverse on your decision to have such content on public display. As a result, the information is only available to administrators. You are, of course, welcome to ask myself or another administrator to restore them, but I just wanted to make you aware of the risks involved with releasing personal information on such a public forum. If you wish to have the personal information removed so that even administrators cannot view it, I can request oversight on your behalf. You are also welcome to discuss this with me on my talk page, or privately via e-mail if you have any concerns. Again, I do not want to scare you. Wikipedia is a fantastic place with an incredibly supportive community. I'm just trying to ensure you are fully aware of the risks involved in editing, which are very similar to the risks you come across every day online. Hope to hear from you. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 21:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Offer
Hi Dharris. I also want to apologize for some of the comments you've received. My very first article at Wikipedia was deleted because I didn't know that there were rules on which articles should be included, but I was luckier than you in that no one yelled at me. I hope we haven't put you off completely.

From reading the article talk page and your talk page, I'm still not sure if anyone has properly explained what people are arguing about. (Please forgive me if they have and I missed it.) Basically, Wikipedia encourages that articles only be created if the subject has gotten significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. This is especially important for biographies of living people. In this case, a reliable source could be something like a newspaper article or magazine article that specifically reviews Andy's performance (not just mentions that he played role X in production Y). Most web sites aren't included as reliable sources because they are self-published. IMDB is especially not reliable because it allows anyone to submit information.

Sometimes it happens that a person can't meet the notability criteria right now, but in a few months or years they are "noticed" and get good coverage in newspapers, magazines, etc. In that case, the article could be created then. You are likely in the best position to notice the types of sources that would help show that Andy Scott Harris meets the inclusion criteria. If you find these and would like some help, please feel free to let me know and I can help you write a solid article that won't be deleted. It definitely requires finding the sources, though.

In the meantime, you should be very proud of your son, and I hope that his career progresses so that there is no doubt of an article about him meeting the WP inclusion criteria. Karanacs (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)