User talk:Jackiespina777

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! S Philbrick (Talk)  22:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi there ... My name is Jackie Spina. I received the content I used to edit Helen Pickett's wiki page from Helen Pickett herself. She is unhappy with the current content (the reversion you replaced her content with today) and would like it to remain as she wrote it, which is the content I inserted. What is an acceptable way for me to provide you with verification that these are her wishes so the page can remain her bio in her own words? I did not include any pictures. The content provides no controversial point of view and is simply biographical information that is neutral and innocuous. None of the content I used to replace the original content is 'troublesome' or 'copyright content'. There are no negative statements, nor is it masquerading as articles or advertising. All the text is directly related to the subject, as it is she! She is also not utilizing it as a soapbox. Anything other than the content I provided is incomplete and bothersome to the person herself. The content I inserted is accurate, current and up to date biographical information from the source herself. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please respond as soon as possible. Thank you. Be well, Jackiespina777 (talk) 01:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC) Jackie Spina

Help me!
Please help me with... Hi there ... How do I cite the source in a wiki page bio if the source of the information is the living, breathing subject of the page who wants their specific autobiographical and correct information to be what is written on the published wiki page bearing their name? Jackiespina777 (talk) 01:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC) Jackie Spina Jackiespina777 (talk) 01:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Jackiespina777, I'm afraid that's what's called original research, and that is not allowed. The source needs to be a published, third-party reliable source, so if you can find that information elsewhere, I would use that.  We strongly discourage autobiographical editing.  That being said, we do protect living people who have an issue with their article from libel or information not in a reliable source (WP:BLP), so if that's the issue, check out WP:AUTOPROB for some guidance.  If you have any further questions about this subject, I would reach out at the biography of living persons noticeboard for more guidance from experts in the BLP policy.  Red Phoenix  talk  02:54, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, and really quick here, too - The content you added to Helen Pickett comes off as WP:PROMOTION in its tone and verbiage. Articles have to maintain a neutral point of view.  That is a policy on Wikipedia.  Please bear that in mind as you work on articles.  Thank you,  Red Phoenix  talk  02:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi ... thank you so much for your response. I am new to Wiki so forgive me if I don’t know the ins and outs yet. I’m not sure if or how you are able to view the edits I made as someone already reverted them. If you’re seeing one paragraph, that is not what I added. To be honest, I don’t see how the content I added is self-promotional. It is simply stating the facts, which are what they are. All it includes is more detailed and accurate information than what was there previously. If the information about a particular living human being is being shared for public consumption, what better resource than the actual person? I don’t understand the reasoning behind strongly discouraging autobiographical information. I also don’t understand how providing facts about oneself can be interpreted as self promotion. This makes no sense to me. I apologize. I am not trying to be argumentative. Just trying to wrap my brain around it.

IF she should decide she would rather have no page about her if she is not able to control the content, is it possible for the page to be removed? Thank you for your guidance. Jackiespina777 (talk) 03:10, 24 September 2020 (UTC) Jackie Spina
 * Hi again Jackiespina777, let me see if I can help you out the best I can. We were all new at some point here :) .  First and foremost, on any article at the top there is a "View History" button next to the Edit button, assuming you are on a computer and not a mobile phone - it's trickier to find on a phone.  There, every edit made to the page is saved and any user can go back and review past revisions, which is how I saw what was added.  As it pertains to the edits being self-promotional, the facts may be true but the tone of the writing is the issue.  For instance, having the first paragraph of your version have a quote from a source praising Helen is a red flag of WP:NPOV, as the first paragraph of any writing is a tone-setter for it, whether an encyclopedia article, an essay, a newspaper story, anything.  Almost all of the rest of your version also reads like a list of accomplishments and not an encyclopedia article.  I might also recommend you read WP:But it's true!.
 * What this is indicative of, and most of why there's a guideline that actually prohibits autobiographical editing, is that editing as an autobiography is inherently a conflict of interest. Although you are the one writing it, and not the subject, she is still a primary source.  Encyclopedias such as Wikipedia, however, rely on secondary sources, as everything we write we want to be absent of original research and from a neutral point of view.  Now, if the subject wants the article deleted, there are a couple of options, but I will tell you that "because the subject wants it deleted" is not going to be reason enough, especially if the article does not contain any WP:BLP violations and is reliably sourced.  You could start with the proposed deletion process, where it'll be deleted in a week if no one objects.  There is also the articles for deletion process, where a seven-day discussion about the subject occurs and if consensus from other editors is to delete, it will be deleted.  A last step could be to reach out via email to info-en-q@wikimedia.org, but I'm not sure they'll be able to do anything more from that point - it's not a part of the process I'm familiar with.
 * I will suggest this to you, though - if your subject has or knows of some newspaper, magazine, or internet (depending on the source) articles about herself with some of this information, and I or another Wikipedian can track those down to review, I can help you to add it in in a better manner that is compliant with the policy. If she's saved any publications of her accomplishments, then it could help to make improvements by saving time doing the appropriate research.  Usually we ask conflict-of-interest editors to simply propose changes on the article's talk page.  We can work at it that way if you like, and if the subject has sources, you can share what the source is and I or another Wikipedian can track it down and try to incorporate something from the source in this manner.  Let me know if you still need my assistance further - if you want to grab my attention, try using the ping template (within the double-brackets, ping|Red Phoenix) and it will notify me.  Thank you,  Red Phoenix  talk  14:49, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I brought your comments back to Helen and she has revised her content. Can I somehow get it to you so you can let me know if it is suitable? Jackiespina777 (talk) 11:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I hope I did this correctly. Jackiespina777 (talk) 11:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I brought your comments back to Helen and she has revised her content. Can I somehow get it to you so you can let me know if it is suitable? Jackiespina777 (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure. What you can do is email me - if you click my username in my signature, it will take you to my user page.  Then on the sidebar on the left, there will be a link that says “Email this user”.  Click that and paste what you have in the box, and click send.  By doing it this way as well, neither you nor I will have our email addresses revealed, so it likewise protects our privacy as well. I’ll be glad to review it and get back with you once I have.  Red Phoenix  talk  13:38, 26 September 2020 (UTC)