User talk:Greyrevell

COI
Hello, Greyrevell. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. 76.248.149.47 (talk) 00:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If you're going to write, as you have for so long, an apparent autobiography at Wikipedia, then inline citations are necessary to support claims--especially those that compare the subject to well-known personalities--and details of personal life, including marriage, divorce, and children. Thank you, 76.248.149.47 (talk) 00:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC

just got your message - i don't think anything i've posted on my page, with exception of my divorce info has run afoul of any journalistic standards. I'll be happy to remove that line immediately, is there anything else on there that doesn't have a verifiable citation.? I believe the references section covers everything.
 * Actually, everything needs to be cited. A lot of it reads like 'notability by association'. Comparisons to famous musicians need to be directly referenced--who made the comparisons, and are they reliable sources? There's no evidence that Paleface is notable, and the link is to a disambiguation page. Most importantly, it's not your page--what amazes me is that it's an autobiography that's gone pretty much unassessed for 6 1/2 years.

76.248.149.47 (talk) 00:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

what exactly is a "disambiguation page."? If someone that understands the genre is available to assess the credibility of this article I'll be happy to see it happen. thanks.


 * This is the disambiguation page ; in other words, it doesn't lead to an article on the group. Another unsourced claim in the article is that a song 'became a minor hit among fans of the National Lampoon film'. These aren't issues that require a music critic to suss out.... 76.248.149.47 (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

fair enough on the lampoon line..change has been made.. so how do we get the paleface link to go to this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleface_%28musician%29 which is already in place, as opposed to the disambiguation..? I'm not interested in producing puff pieces..I've done easily verifiable work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.145.121 (talk) 01:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Done. It needs better sources, and needs someone other than you to find them; WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY is really relevant. I'd suggest asking for help at the BLP noticeboard, which is what I might do. Also, please sign in, so you're not editing your autobiography using multiple accounts...just muddies things further. Thanks, 76.248.149.47 (talk) 01:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

ok understood. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.145.121 (talk) 01:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposing edits
FYI, I've opened a thread at the Grey Revell talk page for you or any other editors with a conflict of interest to propose edits to the article. I think posting there will have the best chance of getting a consensus-based response. Also, bear in mind the encyclopedic notability has yet to be demonstrated. I've left links in another section that might help you show sources for your edit proposals. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 03:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

JFHJr, Thanks, that's great! much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.145.121 (talk) 03:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Grey Revell for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Grey Revell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Grey Revell until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JFHJr (㊟) 04:39, 9 October 2012 (UTC)