User talk:Susieshoe

Neutrality
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to George Koonce. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  04:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I was editing the George Koonce page and was almost done, adding in resources. Then it was returned to the original state. Can it be restored to my edits, and then I can go in and remove any commentary. It did take a long time to write. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susieshoe (talk • contribs) — Susieshow (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to George Koonce. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at George Koonce, you may be blocked from editing. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Susieshoe. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article George Koonce, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

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. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:42, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Orange Mike: I am a journalist and am confused by your comments about neutrality. I would like to know examples of what is not neutral in the article. It is full of facts supported by resources. I see the article is returned to its incomplete form. I included a stat chart, information about his childhood, and what Koonce has done in recent years. None of it was untrue or written in a biased fashion. In short, I was trying to make it more complete. How may I work with the staff at Wikipedia to make this profile more complete? Please let me know how best to do this. Concrete examples to show how the article is not neutral would be very helpful. Others have read it and see nothing but facts.I read the guidelines, but do not see how I violated any of them. Please help!! Thanks.

I would like to add that there is no conflict of interest. I have met George Koonce recently to obtain permission to use the photo on this page and he gave me his resume. I do not see how that is a conflict of interest; rather I feel I went above and beyond by trying to contact him in order to make this page better. A photo was needed. Please explain how there is a conflict of interest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit&section=1# https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.30.1.162 (talk) 00:57, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Your efforts have so much concentrated on Koonce that it is hard to avoid a suspicion that you are working for him or someone else. The language is hopelessly promotional, starting with the lede. "after his retirement from pro ball in 2000, his career became multifaceted and took him down a different road. Today, he includes scholar, author and educator to his list of credentials"'???? The mixed metaphor (his career first becomes multifaceted, then takes him down a road????) is followed by a sentence fragment that paints him as some kind of Renaissance man, while illiterately asserting that he includes these things to a list???? This all reads like an incompetent effort to assemble some kind of brochure content for his book campaign; I'm sorry, but it's the truth. Hey, I'm a UWM alumnus myself, and would not mind a non-promotional effort to add impartially-stated content from reliable sources (i.e., not his resume or press releases). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;  Talk  20:53, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Orange Mike: Apparently my efforts to write well using several types of literary constructions have been misconstrued by you. That is how I would have begun any newspaper article for any newspaper....not a press release. Obviously you do not know the difference as you likely have not been trained as I have. I have served as a reporter and editor for numerous years and your rude comments are completely off. I have shared this article with many of my journalism friends and they agree that there is no PR work in this article. What's more, is that I took the time to work hard to improve his article - which in my opinion was a shabby excuse for an entry -- did hours of research, included sources, went above and beyond to try to contact Mr. Koonce to use his photo, and you have erased all of my efforts in one swoop without as much as an explanation with examples until now. And I disagree with your examples. In addition, you threatened to block me without knowing any of the details behind this and making quite a few assumptions, which led you to have biases at the get-go. You are highly unprofessional and rude. Why did you erase ALL of the article that I wrote? For example, the stat chart, which enhanced the article, was straightforward and could no way be construed as biased. In fact, I got the idea from looking at Reggie White's page. MY article was much more complete, easier to read, and frankly much more interesting. If you are truly interested in making Wikipedia the best it can be, you would have worked with me in a positive manner (not throw insults) or kept the parts (which there are many) that are straightforward - like the stat chart. I thought we had the same goal - to improve the information in Wikipedia. I have to wonder if you share that goal.

I am sorry you think I am promoting his book. If that is the bone of contention, I would gladly have taken that out. I included that because it is his most recent project and I included a potential release date because that is what an editor for a newspaper would have requested -- the reader would want to know that. I found lots of articles in Milwaukee media that talk about his thesis, which is being transformed into the book. So,I thought it should be included. Let me also note that the majority of my sources in the article were NOT his resume. Your comments make me wonder if you thoroughly read it.

What is currently there for Mr. Koonce defeats the purpose of Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit#

Help me!
Hello. i was uploading information with references on the George Koonce page and it has been restored to the original. I need to know how to get my page back. It has taken me a long time and I was just adding the references. Thank you.

Susieshoe (talk) 04:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Click the view history button on the top of the article. See Help:Page history for more help. Mkdw talk 05:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Help me!
Help me with... Hi, I attempted to upload a photo on the George Koonce page. Is there a lag time from when I upload it to when it appears on the page? Thanks.

Susieshoe (talk) 06:45, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You have to add the image to the article once you've uploaded it. I suggest you read Your first article and WP:IMAGE for help. Mkdw talk 10:34, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You have added the image to Wikimedia Commons (it's located here), but you haven't explained why it is free to reuse (it looks remarkably like a posed publicity shot, which is almost certainly not free for reuse. If you didn't take it yourself, you don't own the copyright and should not be trying to upload it here or at Commons; doing so is a copyright infringement). If it is in fact free, then once you have added the appropriate licensing information you can use it on Wikipedia by adding the code  to the page. There's some basic information on formatting in this essay, but please read the Image Use Policy and be sure that the image is appropriately licenced before adding it to Wikipedia. Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  11:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I obtained written permission from the owner of the photo and sent it to the appropriate email address for Wikipedia. I was now allowed to upload the photo. I hope that I did that correctly.

Thanks again.

Susan https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit&section=3# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susieshoe (talk • contribs) 21:47, 16 March 2014‎ (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

 * Coin Icon.svg If I may offer "my two cents" on the issue with the George Koonce article, I'd like to note that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, meaning that journalistic style and content may not be appropriate. You may also want to read the guideline on "words to watch".  Anon 126   (talk - contribs) 17:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your constructive input. I very much appreciate it.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit&section=5# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:BFC0:B:97B:369E:F0B:9FD1 (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Let's try a do-over
Hi Susieshoe:

OrangeMike and I had a brief exchange on my talk page, and he thought it best that I help you out a bit getting started (if you're interested, of course). Let me start by saying that trying to start editing English Wikipedia (hence enWP) by wanting to add information to a biographical article is one of the most difficult paths you could take. (Only medical and "fringe theory" article are more difficult, and I can't bring to mind any successful editor who started there.) First, there's a decade's worth of policy and guidelines that you're expected to have under your belt:  WP:NEUTRAL, WP:VERIFY, WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:TONE.... et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Not having internalized even one of these is an opportunity to make a mistake. Added to this, biographical articles received a much higher level of scrutiny, and so there's less tolerance for mistakes (and often less civility when pointing out mistakes). If all you want to do is edit that one article, sinking two weeks into understanding the WP:MOS (Manual of Style) is just not going to be a good use of your time.

So here's where I can help. I'd like to take a look at the edits you'd like to make, a few at a time, and discuss them with you. It's probably best to do this on the talk page of the article. If they look good to me, you can add them as-is. If someone else has a problem with a particular edit, then they can discuss it with the both of us. If the edit needs to be reworded or requires better citation, I can explain to you what's required and give you a few examples.

If you're up for that, let me know. If not, no worries.

Best,

Lesser Cartographies (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * And on the things that are genuinely non-problematic, no-brainers (like the stats), I'll be delighted to help get stuff in the best place, with the best format, that I know how. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  23:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Lesser Cartographies. I know you are going above and beyond to help me, and I want you to know how much I appreciate it. Yes, I would very much like to take you up on your offer. I am very excited about the opportunity to update the George Koonce page. How shall we begin? You mentioned using the talk pages. That works well for me. Shall I go to your talk page and post a section for your review?

I want to also thank you, Orange Mike, for your offer to help as well.

Thanks to you both! Have a great day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit&section=7#


 * Hi Susieshoe. Let's hold the conversation at the talk page of the article:  Talk:George Koonce.  See you there!  Lesser Cartographies (talk) 01:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good! Thank you!https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Susieshoe&action=edit&section=7#