User talk:WillStott

VSTS question
Hi. I was browsing through the people seeking adoption, and I came across your question about editing VSTS related materials here at Wikipedia.

Let me start by saying that if you are the kind of person who easily listens to what other people say, working collaboratively but not necessarily directly with a subject, can tolerate other people ignoring or changing anything and everything you write, and earn the ire of several editors simply because they see you as a Microsoft evangelist, then you are in the right place. :-)

Okay, my tongue was planted loosely in my cheek as I wrote that. However, there is a lot of truth in it, too. There is a guideline referred to as WP:COI, which is concerned with Conflicts of Interest (COI). I am personally involved in some of the current discussions seeking to loosen up that guideline a bit, because I see people, such as yourself, being capable of writing and editing neutral articles (see WP:NPOV, which is formal policy and an integral part of Wikipedia), even if you have strong interest (even financial interest) in the topic.

Other people who have been around here a lot longer than I have, feel that good intentions notwithstanding, all editors with strong interest eventually fall off the wagon and start causing problems. Their general advice is to not edit anything in which you have a strong interest (mainly because your biases will show through into your writing and you will not be able to accept the criticism from others that your edits are biased). If you have financial interest (as an author of a book on the topic probably does), then you probably have such a strong conflict of interest, that you should definitely not edit the articles on that subject directly.

So, what is someone like you supposed to do? Well, each article has a "talk page" (see Talk pages for more information and guidelines). People with COI are strongly encouraged to propose and discuss changes on the talk pages, and through the process of consensus, work to see the changes are added to the article. In theory, it's not a bad plan. In reality, many editors ignore such comments. Other editors will whine that "if you've got such a great idea, why don't you just do it yourself" (and the corollary of "Be bold in your edits!"), which, if followed, will only get you into conflict with someone (or several someones) pointing to WP:COI.

Please understand that I am not trying to paint a bleak picture of Wikipedia. I am being pragmatic, especially for someone like you who, without this warning, would very likely have a very lousy encounter of the most frustrating kind. Instead, by knowing this, you can enter into the waters slowly, and with your eyes wide open. There are certainly editors who contribute who are also authors in the field in which they edit. There are people who cautiously edit articles in which WP:COI might apply, but because they worked to develop a solid edit history first, and who were very open and honest with their interests, are considered acceptable by the community to edit--cautiously. :-)

So, if this is something you are still interested in pursuing, I would start developing a public relations campaign of sorts. I don't mean to be artificial and only tell/show people what they want to hear. I mean, in an unrelated or loosely related section of Wikipedia, start editing. Start out small while you learn the interface. Experience the collaborative process as it unfolds. Become active in AFD discussions (very eye-opening to how Wikipedia works and the things to which people object). Get your edit count (how many times you have edited pages) up, because you are not taken very seriously here until your count tops 100 at a minimum, 500 as low-end serious, or 1,000 as an indication that you do intend to become a serious editor. By 2,000, I felt that I had "earned my stripes", and around 2,700 I was actually nominated to become an admin (I declined due to a desire to keep editing as I had been, but chances are I would have been considered too "young" in my edit count anyway.).

It sounds like the edit count is the important thing. It really isn't. I think it is more the acknowledgment that by the time you hit X edits, you've likely run afoul of some policies and guidelines, and the community can see how you reacted. By that point, you've probably been involved in an "edit war" (a disagreement between two or more editors about what should be in or out of an article, and each party keeps editing the text to their point of view instead of coming to consensus), and the community can see if you tend to initiate them, bail out, or work through productively. Your edit history will have grown to the point where people can see if you are the type of person who primarily cleans up other peoples messes (typos, spelling problems, formatting, etc.), patrols for vandalism, starts lots of stub articles (tiny ones that do not go into depth), completes articles that others start, or writes major pieces and develops them fully, or something else. There are many different roles that people assume here, and really none are considered better or worse than the other. Everyone who contributes is helping out.

That being said, if you want to eventually write articles closer to your interest, then I would suggest that after the initial learning curve, you work on starting and/or developing longer works in the technology subjects. There are several policies and guidelines of which you should be aware: WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:EL, WP:POINT, WP:NOT, and never forget WP:NPOV. The Five Pillars or Wikipedia are the most important of all the policies, and if you stick to the intent of those, you shouldn't ever stray too far or get into too much trouble.

So, for now, have fun editing your user page. Find some more fun userboxes for decoration (though you might want to avoid ones that are extremely personal for privacy reasons or extremely political for easier editing with others of differing views down the road). Bear in mind that nothing is every really deleted here. So, don't ever post your e-mail or phone number unless you enjoy the thought of having to change them someday. Never post anything you would not want considered in future employment decisions. And try to never lose your cool or act in an uncivil manner.

Sorry for writing a book to you, but I truly empathize with your situation, and I wanted to help if I could. I hope I didn't scare you off, because Wikipedia is a REALLY fun and amazing place to contribute. You just have to have the right mindset. I'm a computer tech myself, and I edit almost exclusively in the food and drinks section (mostly cocktails so far, and I don't even drink them more than once in a blue moon!). There is something to be said for WP:COI's logic of avoiding the areas where you have strong interest. I am fairly sure my stress level is lower for following that bit of advice. :-)

I'd be happy to "adopt" you if you feel comfortable based on all I've just said, or you can just ask me questions anytime whether we "adopt" or not. Take care, and most of all, have fun! -- Willscrlt (  Talk &middot; Cntrb  ) 06:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Adoption
I saw you wanted adoption. Reply on my talk page. ♥ Shapiros10 Wuz  Here ♥ 01:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, you go to me if you have any questions on how to do things, what something is, or if you are locked in an edit war (I hope that doesn't happen!). ♥ Shapiros10 Wuz  Here ♥ 20:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Oh, and for communication, use talk pages instead of someone's user page. ♥ Shapiros10 Wuz  Here ♥ 20:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

 * Ignore him. he's just being cautious, since he didn't know that you din't have a Conflict of Interest.  Feel free to edit on whatever topic you choose! ♥ Shapiros10  Wuz  Here ♥ 19:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Finding other computer developers on Wikipedia
At the bottom of your userpage, there is a link called Category:Wikipedians in the Association for Computing Machinery. Click there and you will find other computer developers. ♥ Shapiros10 Wuz  Here ♥ 19:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)