User talk:Steve Brackett

Welcome!

Hello, Steve Brackett, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Gururaj Deshpande. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GenuineArt (talk) 06:49, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Gururaj Deshpande, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 07:06, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gururaj Deshpande

First, I have no idea who you are as wp:Wikipedia is anonymous. It is Wikipedia's policy that content needs to be wp:verifiable. Any significant content should wp:cite a wp:reliable source. Use of your own knowledge is not verifiable and should not be added to Wikipedia - such is termed wp:original research. See help:referencing for beginners. Try wp:RefToolbar/2.0, it is available on the default Wikipedia editor. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 07:21, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Gururaj Deshpande. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Jim1138 (talk) 07:28, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, I'm confused, these are events that I have personally witnessed, how is one to post such things? Should I create a page for Peter Brackett and use it as a refernce? .... added at 07:32, 19 August 2018‎ by Steve Brackett

You can only write up events that you have personally witnessed if you can also provide independent, reliable, published evidence for these. Please see WP:V and WP:NOR.

If Peter Brackett merits an article, people not related to him may create it and add to it. Please see WP:COI.

A Wikipedia article, no matter how good, may not be used as a reference for assertions in another Wikipedia article. Please see WP:UGC. -- Hoary (talk) 07:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this page we're talking about has glaring inacuracies that have supposed reliable references. Such as the fact that Deshpande was ousted from Coral netowrks, not successfully sold it! This is my first time trying to make entries in wikipedia, is this really what wikipedia is all about? People are allowed to use any bogus media article as a supposed "reliable source" but people who witnessed events aren't allowed to publish even if the give their actual name. Oh well, so much for wikipedia, I'll just put up an actual web page stating these facts then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve Brackett (talk • contribs) 08:04, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your talk with four tildes "~~~~"

Your own website, blog, YouTube, etc. would fall under wp:selfpublished and is not considered wp:reliable source. See wp:NOTRS. Jim1138 (talk) 08:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is something like what Wikipedia is about. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. However, no, people are not allowed to use any bogus media article. If it's bogus, or likely to be bogus, you should point this out.

I think that one thing you object to in the article is "He left the company prior to its sale in 1993 to SynOptics he sold the company for $15 million". This syntactically garbled and ambiguous sentence is "sourced" (as we say) to "network world, Dec 1993". You might reasonably ask what this means. I imagine that there was some magazine titled Network World; if so, what author, what article title, what page number? If you can get access to this -- and for all I know it might be available for the asking at Google Books; I haven't looked -- you might see if the article actually says this. Perhaps it does not.

Or again, "His father was a labor commissioner with the Indian government" is "sourced" to "Gururaj Deshpande - The billionaire next door", at http://jobs.oneindia.in/careerhub/profiles/gururaj.html. The latter is dead, but it lives on at http://web.archive.org/web/20120317060627/http://jobs.oneindia.in/careerhub/profiles/gururaj.html. This does indeed state what the Wikipedia article attributes to it, and I think it's a decent enough source for this; but it seems a curiously sycophantic source and it makes me wonder about the quality of the others that are cited.

So even without using your personal knowledge, you can improve the article. However, I strongly suggest that you do this after first practising your Wikipedia-editing skills a little on entirely uncontroversial matters. (For example, you might see how reliable, published sources may help you improve the article about some town you've lived in.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:54, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signatures and talk pages

Please don't "sign" your additions to articles as you did here. I removed it. Also, if someone replies to your talk, it's considered best practice not to remove or modify it as it can make the result confusing. your removal. I restored it. You can strike it out with <s>text to strike</s> which generates ~~text to strike~~ See help:talk pages and wp:talk page guidelines. I restored the text. Strike it out if you wish. Please leave the signature. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Talk:Dale L Boger

Hi. I noticed that you recently made a series of edits to Talk:Dale_L._Boger which include a number of allegations of wrongdoing against others, including a named person. These are serious allegations (e.g., fraud, fraudulently, threatened) about a named person. No citations given. Based on LinkedIn, that named person appears to be currently alive, making them subject to the WP:BLP policy.

The talk page is for discussion about how to improve an article, not a soapbox for expressing your views and beliefs. And talk pages are not exempt from the rules about biographies of living persons. Please read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines:

Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject.
Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons...applies to talk pages as well as to articles.

For that reason I've deleted your comments which I believe is the appropriate step for personal attacks, again per WP:TPG. I considered taking the additional step of asking an admin to hide your edit but I'm not sure that is necessary as long as such allegations are not re-added to Wikipedia without reliable sourcing.

Happy to address any concerns/questions you might have. Oblivy (talk) 06:19, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are actual events that I myself witnessed, I'm trying to expose fraud and deception in the pharmaceutical industry, Boger is free to defend himself and the actions of his students in the talk section as well isn't he? How else are people supposed to learn the truth. <refhttps://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/six-things-big-pharma-doesnt-want-you-know></ref> Steve Brackett (talk) 08:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you guys are harassing me and preventing me from making posts regarding issues you know nothing about. I'm a chemist exposing fraud and deception in the pharmaceutical industry by relaying actual events that I participated in. Steve Brackett (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that requires all content can be verified using reliable, independent sources, which means articles cannot contain original research (which your own experiences would be). This means that it's likely not the correct place for exposing fraud and deception. Taavi (talk!) 15:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Seth L. Harrison for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seth L. Harrison is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth L. Harrison until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Taavi (talk!) 10:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you guys are harassing me and preventing me from making posts regarding issues you know nothing about. I'm a chemist exposing fraud and deception in the pharmaceutical industry by relaying actual events that I participated in. Steve Brackett (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Steve Brackett I have suggested some relevant policies for you to look at, to better understand the criteria for inclusion of information in a Wikipedia article. @Taavi has as well.

Put simply, everything added to Wikipedia needs to be backed up by a reliable source. As you clearly think this material belongs on Wikipedia, I suggest you find some reliable secondary sources which discuss it and then cite those. WP:OR specifically says not to include information from your own experience or research:

"Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material."

Policy can feel bureaucratic and frustrating, but following it will help make your content more "sticky" and hopefully make editing Wikipedia more rewarding for you. Oblivy (talk) 01:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]