I think I have made up my mind about what Wikipedia's policy ought to be. Looking at the comments made on Votes for Deletion regarding MRM Parrott it seems that the amount of heat generated by those who feel Wikipedia is being used for self-promotion far outweighs the amount of knowlege that is imparted in the article, MRM Parrott.
I also note that the debate rapidly turns nasty with Mark (MRM Parrott} being protrayed as essentially, "no good", a gross exaggeration of whatever defects he may have.
It is hard to establish presence on the internet and in popular and academic culture. You can have a really cool website, have great ideas, write and publish books, some of them quite good and not much happens. Your books don't get reviewed in important media by significant reviewers, not even bad reviews. Your books don't sell, even a good one with something to say. And it is frustrating. It is understandable why people in such circumstances try to promote themselves.
Therefore I propose that when an apparent autobiography is encountered that a note be made in the talk page of the article, and on the page of the editor if they are a wikipedia user linking to our autobiographical policy (Which ought to clearly state that it is against Wikipedia policy to engage in writing self-promoting aricles about yourself or your projects). We should also make a reasonable attempt to contact them by email (googling for their websites may work for anonymous editors) and explain the policy.
After a reasonable chance to respond (here it gets a bit tricky, since they usually can't delete the page they made themselves) then the page should be listed on votes for deletion or simply deleted with the authors consent now that they understand the policy. I think the rule probably needs to be hard and fast, all autobiographies are to be deleted, regardless of fame or lack of it. In the case of folks who rate an article for some reason we can trust someone will eventually write one.
In summary, we should be courteous, understanding, and bottom line, firm.
Hopefully we can minimize hurt feelings and maintain encyclopedic policy.
Fred
From: tarquin tarquin@planetunreal.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 11:46:45 +0000 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Clearer policy on self-written and obscure biographies
Toby Bartels wrote:
We don't need a special policy for autobiographies which states that unverifiable biographies are unacceptable, if we already have a policy that all articles must be verifiable. That said, it's justifiable, in meta pages on biography conventions, to ''mention'' that all articles, including biographies, should be verifiable. And it would be a good idea to mention this if there have been problems -- which it seems that there have! But this is not Yet Another Policy ^_^.
Agreed. It's making a page to explain this particular aspect of existing policy. My motivation is that when I directed MRM Parrott to "what WP is not" he said that nothing there prevented him having an article.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l