User talk:SchrodingersFact

Welcome!
Hello, SchrodingersFact, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:SchrodingersFact/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
 * Article development
 * Standard layout
 * Lead section
 * The perfect article
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! TLJ7863 (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:SchrodingersFact/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:SchrodingersFact/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. (See section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TLJ7863 (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I am currently in the process of writing this article and still need to further investigate some more controversial aspects about this individual (I have a few articles and sources on hand already that I need to convert into section in the page – should be done in about 30 minutes with a preliminary draft!). The most readily available information was found on their company website so I started with that and have been working on this for the past few hours. I do however have many other sources at my disposal – would greatly appreciate a little bit more time to work on this :)
 * Unfortunately it does not appear to have been written in a neutral point of view and does not contain enough independent or reliable sources to indicate notability. It reads more as an advert. Sorry TLJ7863 (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback – let me rewrite and try to add more opposing viewpoints to neutralize the piece. I just added a section about outstanding lawsuits so as to try to show more of the full picture. Will spend the next hour strictly trying to add content that tries to address your very valid points! SchrodingersFact (talk) 15:33, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Just removed the "Projects" section which I think was the page that felt the most promotional – based off what you said I don't think that this is the right place to showcase those projects as it did feel quite promotional and biased. Let me know if that helps it a bit @TLJ7863! SchrodingersFact (talk) 15:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Tried the best I could to take into acount your perspective regarding the bias – would love to get your input @TLJ7863 on how it looks now. Do you think it's too biased in one direction or the other, just let me know and I'll counterbalance to the direction you think it ought to go. Looking at this from the vantage point of the writer definitely limits my perspective! SchrodingersFact (talk) 23:21, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd imagine you'd still need more reliable and independent sources if you wished to move it into mainspace. See also WP:notability. Also ensure that there is no conflict of interest (writing about something or someone you are connected to). Thanks. TLJ7863 (talk) 23:33, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input @TLJ7863 – this is my first time taking trying to make a meaningful contribution to Wikipedia seriously. Honestly what sparked it was learning that ChatGPT can take care of a lot of the syntactical stuff and I just need to do research and write.
 * With respect to notability I completely agree – some of my sources are solid but there are quite a few that are not the kind of thing you could use in a school paper.
 * As for conflict of interest I chose this person because I simultaneously love and hate what they are doing – on one hand they're building a non-profit that has done some pretty cool projects, but on the other hand they've allegedly taken advantage of their privileged position to further enrich themselves. Genuinely just find this person so fascinating and complex and was shocked that there was nothing on Wikipedia about him already especially given how much press coverage and supposed status he seems to have! On the note of conflict of interest is there any way to prove I don't have much of a horse in this race without revealing my identity – I would be open to doing so but the downside becomes I can't write as objectively as I'll have concerns about what people think of me to be frank. Know of any good strategies on this front? SchrodingersFact (talk) 00:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Usually with conflict of interest you'd have to either publicly declare it or it'd be noticed in the writing if there was a non neutral point of view. TLJ7863 (talk) 00:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Gotcha! I think I should go back and forth between views as I write rather than trying to write all of one side then all of the other side as by the time I try to get to the other side there's already a presumption of bias! SchrodingersFact (talk) 00:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The reason I called my account "SchrodingersFact" is because it's a play on "Schrodinger's Cat," where you have two opposing possibilities occurring simultaneously. By acknowledging this duality of reality, you arrive at the concept of "fact," hence "SchrodingersFact."
 * I wanted to write about Henry Elkus due to the pronounced dichotomy in his nature, oscillating between being a steward of an impactful non-profit then a ruthless capitalist with allegations of fraud and other white collar crimes.
 * The fact that he's doing both a non-profit and a for-profit at the same time got me wanting to contribute more to pieces about Sam Altman. He underwent the unique transformation from running a non-profit to establishing a for-profit and now runs them both in parallel. This decision may seem indefensible on the surface, but when you dig deeper there's definitely more to it – especially if you consider the fact that he has 0% equity in the for-profit entity.
 * Would love for the general theme of my account to be writing about people with extreme duality and seeing how that contrast in character within one person can be the greatest double-edged sword of all! SchrodingersFact (talk) 00:17, 7 October 2023 (UTC)