Hartsellml

Layne Hartsell

You do realize you've just made a massive self-written biography entry for yourself, with no sources, no rational for any of the information there, etc etc? And frankly, your "influenced by" section is a rather nauseating example of what looks like stoking your own ego; you didn't even bother to properly link most of them. You are apparently influenced by anyone with the name of Russel or Wilber?

Please do not create bios for yourself. If at some point you are considered notable enough for a wiki entry, someone will do it for you. Until then, it would be preferable if you would stick to your own personal webpage. Thanks. Human.v2.0 (talk) 14:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

It's because I didn't set the page up. Why the harsh comments? I thought wikipedia welcomed people to upload info?

No, I don't have to know how to do this, because I didn't do it. Students did this and I told the students to take it down. Now, I would like to get to talk to someone else. Since you know who I am, do you care to tell me who you are? I would voice a complaint over the language used. As I said, anyway, I thought wikipedia welcomed people to upload info..anyone. I know little about it, because I don't let students use it for research because of unreliability. So, I ask two things: 1. Who are you and who is your manager. 2. I would like to speak to someone more cordial in writing. It took me a few minutes to figure out how to use this thing since I received you email, unexpectantly in my email. Layne Hartsell

Human.v2.0 was a little unfriendly, but the gist of what they said is correct. You may need to read WP:INTRO and WP:MFA to understand why we don't accept all information. Put simply, unless someone else has written about something, then it shouldn't be here. If everyone followed that then we would be just as reliable as all the sources used. Who Human.v2.0 is (or myself), is unimportant - you have chosen to disclose who you are, but there is no need to do so to edit. We don't have managers (thankfully) but I am an administrator and am willing to answer any further questions you have. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 16:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not being harsh, I'm being blunt. I am required to take a measure of good faith in your actions, I am not required to believe that they are correct (they're not). Consider this peer review, something that you should be familiar with.

You obviously have some familiarity with Wikipedia procedures (your bio, though incorrectly self-generated, largely unsourced and containing a derth of material that is to the general editor (in this case: me) of no merit other than self-inflation) was properly formatted and displayed firm knowledge of wiki-code and formatting. That's all the more reason that I believe you should very well know that placing it there yourself (and to the lesser extent, your lack of sources) is automatic grounds for immediate deletion. In short: you should know better, and I can reasonably assume that you do in one way or another. Not saying you had ill intent, but I find it hard to assume that you knew how to put the page together that well and not know you shouldn't.

That said, there were numerous issues with the content. Your "influenced by" section is in poor taste at the very least; you pretty much named a "who's who" of celebrities (in thier fields) with no rhyme or reason. It reads like someone being asked what they're literary inspirations are and naming Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, Mark Twain and Poe; at best it's naming almost universal influences, and regardless it just comes off as pointless name-dropping. Your listing of "main interests" is just as generic and pointless; this is not your resume, nor is it Facebook.

Have I explained myself clearly enought? Do you have any specific comments or questions?

Note: The following was added to my edit after your later paragraph, and the comment by SmartSE. I have not edited the above to reflect that change.

PS: I have no manager. I am God. MUAHAHAHAHA. But no, seriously, you might want to educate yourself on some various Ways o' the Web if you're asking to speak to my manager. And if you have student who made this (and what, they registered with your email? riiiiiiight) then you might want to speak to your Dean (or similar position of power) about getting them expelled. Or buy then a coffee; I can't say that I really care. Heck, if you have concern over the "language" I used (I certainly didn't go blue as a one-eyed-sailor there), maybe I should be the one buying you a coffee for a debate over the definitions of "global justice", "society" and "ethics". Human.v2.0 (talk) 16:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, I can see that this is unhelpful. All of the info I did write and I asked students to help put it up. They took over the process and yes, used my email or username. I thought that it was ok to put personal bios wikipedia, other friends have done so. I had no idea that you could not write your own bio. Whenever and academic does anything professionally, including CV, s/he writes a bio. It's a common thing. Actually, my reasoning is that by putting a bio up on wikipedia would prevent me from having to maintain a personal website. So, all of this ego issue is fairly strange when all of that info I put up is factual - and not massive - it was 1.5 A4 sized paper. Another thing you didn't notice is that most of my academic influences ARE people I either work with now or have studied with. As for the dead, well you seem to expect some kind of miracle from me. So, let's leave off with your self inflations and rhetorical references to yourself as God as you sit behind code and won't allow peer review of yourself. You mentioning that I should be familiar with peer review and thinking wikipedia is 'peer' review is absurd. I had no idea that though 'all can post' something, we can't post bios. It was an honest non-understanding on my part, because, well I don't use Wikipedia alot, or have no idea of how to post things (not a mistake), something you clearly have no concern other than to act as a 'peer board.' If you have debate with my publications, the recent ones are there at the bottom, the referenced ones, you can contact the reviews at those institutions. That's how academia works. That's how peer review works. I expect that you will follow journalistic integrity here and mine will be the last entry in this matter.

I had no idea that you could not write your own bio.

Okie dokie. Well, whoever knew wiki code well enough to create that probably should have. I'm not saying it's a 100% thing, but I would certainly expect it at that point.

my reasoning is that by putting a bio up on wikipedia would prevent me from having to maintain a personal website

The exact point here is that this is something wikipedia specifically is not: your personal website. The same actually goes for your userpage; it's not your personal website, and should not be treated as such. Also, having not seen what your "other friends" have put up I can (and can't) say several things.

• Regardless of anything else, an individual is not allowed to create or edit subjects involving themselves. Bill Gates is not allowed to come on and edit his or Microsoft's pages, to give a very simple example.
• I do not know the content of these pages, and cannot comment on that. I came across yours, and I can comment on that.

Another thing you didn't notice is that most of my academic influences ARE people I either work with now or have studied with.

How is someone supposed to notice this? You have no sources listed. There are no references that give any of this information as factual, and this is a requirement of wikipedia (again, something that someone knowing this much wiki code should be expected to know). I do not care who you claim to have worked with or studied under; if you do not have a source for the info, it does not get included.

The whole concept here on wikipedia can be summed up in a very juvenile way: Prove It. Unless you have a source to prove something, it doesn't go here.

Also, all of that is aside from the fact that it would not be the expected wiki-format for a biography.

you sit behind code and won't allow peer review of yourself

thinking wikipedia is 'peer' review is absurd

have no idea of how to post things (not a mistake)

Actually, that's the very definition of a mistake, or at least one of. "An error in action, calculation, opinion, or judgment caused by poor reasoning, carelessness, insufficient knowledge, etc." This was all an error in action caused, as you claim, by insufficient knowledge. That's why it's a mistake and not an act of deliberate ill-will.

The entirety of Wikipedia is peer-review (precisely: review by peers). Barring the Up On High Admins, there is an equal standing for all editors. That includes an equal stance to both make and correct mistakes. It happens. I have no "journalistic integrity" here because I am not a journalist; I'm not even sure where that fits in here.

Please, don't get yourself bothered by the fact that I have absolutely zero intention of sharing my identity with you. It's not required or relevant, and frankly speaking I was not the one that chose to place my biography and personal history on a publicly accessible website.

I guess all I can say after that is that this is not a personal thing; I'd never heard of you before this. I have never read (to my knowledge) a publication of yours, and as such have no disagreement with them. This is not a critique of you, this is a critique of a wikipedia page that was created against rules and of a questionable content. Do not feel that it has to run you off from wikipedia until your dieing days, but you also should not have the impression that there won't be someone who will catch an error that has been made. It's the way of things.Human.v2.0 (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Hartsellml

User:Hartsellml, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hartsellml and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Hartsellml during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 15:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hey, I'm really sorry I didn't get to respond earlier. We actually have a notability guideline for professors, I'm not sure myself if you're eligible for inclusion under these guidelines or not though. If you were, you should be really careful about creating the article yourself because of our conflict of interest guidelines. However, from looking through what your students wrote, you've done some amazing work and we'd love to have you contribute. Unfortunately, sometimes people can be a bit difficult to work with - as I'm sure you've discovered in academia - but I find the experience to be worth it anyways. I'll talk to this other editor, and if you have any questions about contributing, please don't hesitate to ask on my talk page or via email. Thanks so much for not giving up on us yet. Best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 01:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

That's great! So I'm afraid I'm not an expert in biomedicine or psychology, but you could definitely check out the collaborations we have - called WikiProjects - on those subjects: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine and Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology. If there's an article you're interested in working on, I can help you format it correctly if you'd like. Also, please feel free to ask if you have questions or anything. Happy editing! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 17:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 07:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)