User talk:NancyNash

Welcome!
Hello, NancyNash, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 16 September
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Nancy Nash page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=681393949 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F681393949%7CNancy Nash%5D%5D Ask for help])

Your edits
I want to be very clear about something in all of this: I have no desire or interest in "slandering" you or being unfair to you. I've got no skin in the game at all, and if you were to ask me what I personally believe about the situation, I'd have to say that I'm on your side — for a lot of reasons, I think you were in the right and Leonard George was in the wrong. But our role on Wikipedia is not to uncritically accept one person's side of the story while portraying the other one as a liar — our job is to fairly and neutrally present both sides of the dispute, based on what reliable sources that are independent of the situation say about it, without taking sides either way.

We cannot publish unsourced claims about the inside story, regardless of whether they're coming from you or him — we have to stick with what the media coverage of the situation said about it, and cannot publish anything that isn't verifiable in a newspaper or magazine article about it. I'm perfectly happy to consider revising or editing the way the article portrays the situation — again, like I said, if I had to take a side I'd support you over him any day — but any changes will have to be supported by reliable source coverage, and will have to be neutral in tone and presentation. For instance, even if it's true that Dan George didn't actually have any copyright rights over the song at all, and that it was actually thousands of years old and/or Tibetan in origin, we still can't say that until a reliable source has been provided to support that information. Regardless of who was right or wrong, our job on here is to neutrally and fairly present both sides of the story without taking sides. The article makes an effort to be fair to both of you in the matter, exactly as it's supposed to — I did, for instance, point out your statement that he gave his approval and then withdrew it only after the song had been recorded and released (and I completely believe that to be true, too). It's not our place to smear you, but the article isn't trying to do that — and just as importantly, it's not our place to smear Leonard either, but your alternative version of the article was crossing that line.

One other thing you must be aware of is that it is a binding policy of Wikipedia that you are not allowed to make legal threats against other Wikipedians — you can actually be blocked from editing Wikipedia for doing that. We have processes in place by which any content disputes can be resolved internally, and as I said I'm more than willing to consider making some revisions to the article as long as they're supported by reliable source coverage. I have no interest in "slandering" you — but our job on here is to balance your side of the story and his, being as fair as possible to both of you and not taking sides either way. Bearcat (talk) 04:12, 18 September 2015 (UTC)