User talk:Gonzo84d

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Jean Sasson. Thank you. Sole Soul (talk) 00:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

You have been. (blocked by MuZemike 20:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC))

You may contest this block by adding the text below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

20:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC) gonzo84d

I have no reason to doubt your explanation, but still, you have a conflict of interest and should not have edited the article directly. Instead, you should have suggested the changes in the talk page, as I already told Jean Sasson. You seem well informed about Wikipedia's policies and your arguments are pretty plausible, although I don't agree with all of them. I endorse your unblocking if you promise not to edit the article again. Meanwhile, I'll address some of the issues you raised in the article's talk page. Thanks. Sole Soul (talk) 23:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and it (COI) was a mistake on my part. I apologize. I do promise not to edit again, although it looks like that's not going to affect anything. I can't respond to your comments on Sasson's talk page, so I'll do that here.

1) Notable events: Her other books may not qualify, but I think that judging by the great attention given to Growing Up, it should be included. It is, after all, a unique, first hand account of life with one of the world's most notable figures. If that's not notable, I'm not sure what is. Included it would also help the undue weight problem.

2)"So, although the words "claims to be" may have negative connotations, it is factually accurate." This is correct. But surely there's a way to say without that doesn't have those connotations. Again, you could put "claims to be" in front of anything and it would still be factually correct, but untrue to the spirit of whatever you were saying. For instance, "George claims to be an honest person." He might be the most honest person in the world, and he might claim it if asked (this would be more evidence of his honesty!). But though there isn't anything technically wrong here, anyone reading that would get the sense that George wasn't honest.

I'd love to provide reliable sources, but aren't allowed to edit, which is why I requested that somebody in the community help out.

As for the merits of the story, I haven't read it and so can't speak firsthand to it. In any case, I don't see how that enters in here.

As for rudeness, it wasn't necessarily the individual edits. It was the wholesale erasing of my changes because I was assumed to be a sockpuppet. There was no dialogue. Anyway, it's not a huge deal.

If you could post this to the Sasson talk page I'd appreciate it. Cheers,

Gonzo84d (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Gonzo84d