User talk:SteveKinney

Welcome!

Hello, SteveKinney, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Professor marginalia 14:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Cheers, ArchStanton 11:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article deleted

I have deleted John West Kinney because it did not assert notability under our guidelines. Please do not re-create it.

Aside from being verifiable (which requires attribution to a reliable source, not family records), subjects need to be notable. In other words, you need to prove that it's true (verifiable) and you need to prove that there's a reason to suppose anyone cares (notable). My own existence is verifiable through reliable sources, but I don't have an article on Wikipedia because I'm not notable. I hope that makes the distinction clear. You may also want to look at this guideline and this guideline, for more dos and don'ts of Wikipedia articles.

If you would like a copy of the deleted article for your own records (with the understanding that you will not try to re-post it as an article) let me know and I will email it to you. Kafziel ^Talk 12:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Bad

Everything I posted are derivative works of U.S. Census reports and verifiable newspaper articles and web sites of specific companies where their names are stated. They are part of our family archives, but we didn't write the core material ourselves. Would a bibliography be more helpful? I have gone down the list of notable Stevens alums and I think I now "get" the format you're looking for... there are less impressive Stevens alums who have qualified for a Wikipedia biography. John West Kinney is a more notable Stevens Tech alum because he was directly involved with building some of the most impressive suspension bridges ever made by man, indeed some of them the largest in the world when they were built. Wouldn't you agree?

I'm sorry but, no, I actually do not agree. Thousands of people helped build those things. We don't have articles for all of them. We don't need sources that mention him; we need sources about him. I have no doubt that those other Stevens alumni are less impressive to you, since they aren't related to you. I know it's kind of hard to be objective when the subject is a relative; that's why I recommended the conflict of interest guideline. If he's really notable, someone else will be able to write an article about him.

As for the deletion, it is the job of administrators to carry out unilateral speedy deletions on articles that do not even come close to meeting our criteria, but you are certainly welcome to open a deletion review on this. Kafziel ^Talk 18:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to open a review and waste time citing dozens of examples of biographies in Wikipedia that would not pass through your logic filter but somehow go posted anyway; examples that precisely match mine. Wikipedia isn't that important to me. I offered up a bibilography citing sources about him and that is apparently insufficient for you. Your Conflict of Interest tack is interesting, but that does not detract from the accuracy of my bibliography or the importance of assigning names to past human effort. It sounds like you're trying to make this personal. I'm not going to play your game; but, since you are fairly young, I will, if I may, offer you an observation of mine... In a sudden rush to judgement, we often overlook the opportunity to cultivate relationships and, in so doing, deny ourselves and each other the benefit of humanity. As an aside, you might think about lightening up a bit; life is too short.

I assure you, this is not personal. Look at all the articles I deleted today. A different editor—not me—tagged your article as failing to meet our standards. I just showed up and followed through on the request. As I'm sure you saw if you looked at my userpage, I delete articles alphabetically, starting at "K" and working out from there. Believe me, I derived no joy from deleting your article. As you can (hopefully) see from the link above, it's a pretty tedious task doing all this stuff. If I didn't delete it, the end result would have been the same except that you'd be pissed off at someone else instead of me.

I encourage you again to open a deletion review if you feel the subject is worthy of an article; it might not be a waste of time. It will be looked at by an entirely different set of editors, and I never oppose the restoration of articles I've deleted (because, again, I have no vested interest in the matter). I can't promise you'll like the outcome of the review, but you are guaranteed a fair shake by the community. Kafziel ^Talk 20:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you say it isn't personal, I believe you; but, like I said, Wikipedia just isn't that important to me. I said my piece. I'm done. There are plenty of places elsewhere in Cyberspace where I can go. Seeya.

As you see fit. I really think one day is a little quick to just give up on the project, but that's up to you. Do you want me to email you a copy of the article as you posted it, for your records? Kafziel ^Talk 20:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]