User talk:Kgs32

July 2017
Hello, I'm CaroleHenson. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Michelle Dickinson— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. –CaroleHenson (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Michelle Dickinson
Hi there. Diving in and twice deleting information just because you can't find it, or because a once-published and genuine link might subsequently have been removed by its hosting newspaper is not acceptable behaviour for a competent editor, as you have twice done to the article on Michelle Dickinson. Your belief that you can delete content (for example, her middle name) - because, as you assert "it is not published anywhere", is, at least in that case, patent nonsense. Please see this link to the New Zealand government website on which it is explicitly stated. I see your edits have been reverted by another editor, shortly before I was able to do so myself. In future, do please discuss your concerns on an article's talk page, and let others agree (or otherwise) with your concerns and reach a consensus. It's great that you want to see only good content on Wikipedia, and the concerns you expressed on the talk page of are appreciated, if a little misdirected. I am as concerned as you are when I see poor content on Wikipedia - especially if it relates to biographies of living people, but dashing in to delete fairly minor content really isn't helpful. There should be nothing in a biography that isn't in some form already in the public domain and freely available. But you do need to investigate and look properly first, and I hope you will do so in the future. Please take this feedback in the positive spirit in which it is intended, and welcome to Wikipedia! Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

- Sure... but has anyone here checked with Dr. Dickinson about what information she's ok putting out there. The "biography" is about a living human - not some long-dead person. Or is it that the public 'mania' to have all information known, published, re-published, re-broadcast, re-iterated ad nauseam overrides an individual's right to decide what/how information is disseminated about themselves? You don't need to answer that ... it is rhetorical, answered (at least in part) by how the world operates. That said: I will keep my personal disgust with the blatant disregard for personal-information rights off wikipedia - I promise I won't edit any more articles :-)  All the best, Kgs32 (talk) 23:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC)