897:
here for four years, and you can see lists of the articles I've written and expanded on my user page. I am active on
Facebook and my mobile phone is 707-486-6962. I present myself to you as a real person, not anonymous and faceless. My goal in doing so is to try to reduce the tension that has developed recently about your biography. After reading the talk page, it seems clear that mistakes have been made by both sides. As a novelist (and as an ad man), you must have an excellent ability to put yourself in other's shoes. The editors you're dealing with are human beings, volunteers, who work to maintain an encyclopedia with over four million articles. They have feelings and some may resent harsh accusations. You can criticize Knowledge all you want, and criticize Jimbo Wales by repeating really old stories all you want. Jimbo is not in charge here. I think I know some of Knowledge's problems far better than you do. But you link to your Knowledge biography on your website. You see it as important. It is the #6 website in terms of traffic, and #1 by far in terms of original content.
348:, and therefore all content must be notable (according to the guidelines linked above). "Blog" wasn't notable until it became mainstream. I encourage you to resubmit Bloap once it reaches that level of use, or if you can cite sources showing the term is in widespread use. If we created articles about every term that someone made up, Knowledge would be a bunch of nonsense articles. I'm not saying that Bloap is nonsense, but that there must be standards. --
709:
545:
779:
813:
744:
591:
282:
923:
action is to stop editing your article and suggest changes on the talk page, and do so respectfully and civilly. No one is going to assist you if your attitude remains combative and threatening. Cullen, of course, is free to divulge personal details about himself. However, every editor on
Knowledge is entitled to
1036:
Dear Bbb23: It appears that it is you who is doing the threatening now: "Don't resurrect these comments." Really? Or what? Will the
Knowledge Police come to my home and arrest me? LOL. No, seriously. I am curious as to why you find them so threatening? Why do you feel that letting others see them is
1004:
Sorry, this isn't a tit-for-tat negotiation. Although your tone is more civil, it is still essentially a threat. That's not the way
Knowledge works, and we're not changing Knowledge just for you. So, I suggest you propose your change on the article talk page, and do so in the correct way, not the way
531:
To SlaveToTheWage: I was alerted to changes to this page and opted to cut sections that I thought were promotional in nature. For example, (an overabundance of) references to favorable book reviews -- though accurate and documentable -- have been removed. The remaining sections seem to meet current
1020:
Dear Bbb23 I am not threatening you in any way, shape or form. Please don't be so sensitive. I am simply suggesting a compromise that brings down the level of tension and provides both parties with a way out of this fracas. If I have suggested it in the wrong location, please forgive my ignorance. I
842:
on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit
582:
time editing the faulty information on this page. But when faulty entries are brought to my attention, it seems counter to the spirit of wikipedia to simply ignore them. Crowdsourcing the editing function is at the heart of your mission. I am one of that crowd, and more than passingly familiar with
922:
I didn't even know where
American Canyon was, Cullen - had to look it up. @Sandom, I will be blunter than Cullen. The edits to your article and your tirades on the article talk page are extraordinarily disruptive. If you continue, as Cullen states, you are likely to be blocked. Your best course of
896:
One of your complaints about
Knowledge seems to be that many of the editors are anonymous. Not all are. My name is Jim Heaphy, and I live in American Canyon, California. I own a small business with my wife, have been married for 31 years, and have two young adult sons. I have been an active editor
369:
guidelines strongly urge you not to write about yourself in
Knowledge as it poses significant conflict of interest and neutral point of view problems. Please be VERY careful about our neutral point of view and vanity policies as linked at the top of this page as breaching them will result in your
900:
It is in your best interest to cooperate on a reasonable basis with experienced editors. Please do not edit war or act in a disruptive fashion. If you do, it is very likely that your account will be blocked and you will lose your ability to have input into the article. That would be unfortunate.
964:
So, let me propose this compromise. I will stop my negative comments about
Knowledge and "call off the dogs" as it were, if you agree to post the following copy under the Author section. I believe it is reasonable and strikes a balance between both positive and negative notes. So, here goes:
1056:
It is OK, I got your message and also one from a bot informing me my name was listed at DRN. I will comment when I have time to be thoughtful. I am now a passenger in a bouncing car, responding by Droid Razr. Not optimal. I wish you well, though I disagree with your approach to this matter.
1005:
you've done it here. If you can obtain a consensus for your change, then it can be added to the article. It would be best if someone other than you implemented any agreed-upon change. Otherwise, you're in the awkward position of having to determine consensus when you're conflicted.--
396:
After viewing a "Requires
Citation" note on the entry for my name (following an entry disagreement with Fang!), I tried to insert the proper citations but was unable to operate the footnote function properly. Can you help? I can send you the edited page with the citations if you'd
988:
Sandom's most recent novel, ''The Wave'', was reissued in June 2010 by
Cornucopia Press. ] lauded the story's pacing, concluding: "A story with enough manic energy to be worthy of a nuclear explosion and enough to render moot any structural weaknesses in its architecture."<ref:
606:
policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should
956:
I have absolutely no desire to be at war with Knowledge. There are many things about this resource that I find admirable...although I would prefer it if folks weren't anonymous which, I believe, simply promotes bad behavior and unaccountability.
1021:
am not a Knowledge expert. Frankly, I thought I had already suggested said compromise on the Talk Page. But, in case I didn't or you missed it, let me post it on the Talk Page again. Thanks for your suggestion.
960:
And to Bbb23 I say, look, I didn't start this war. I was being perfectly reasonable (at least I thought so), and was trying to follow your guidelines. It was your editor Huon who escalated this whole thing.
1091:
Ive posted some further comments at the DRN, I dont know if you intend to remain active on Knowledge, but I hope you do. You are more than welcome to make further comments if desired :) --
55:
on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! --
442:
I didn't write this article. But once it was posted, I thought I would update it. And since I saw a note to add citations, I thought I'd try and help out. Was this wrong?
480:, then the article is fine to stay. Just don't be tempted into turning the article into your own soapbox to promote yourself and you'll hopefully stay on the right side of
574:
To SlaveToTheWage: Please avoid threatening those who are trying to correct errors on entries. Also, please note the communication with NetSnipe which reveals that I did
947:
How weird. Once again, I posted a response here and saved it back...and it just vanished. Perhaps this is because Bbb23 was posting at exactly the same time.
978:
the only book award recommended and awarded solely by teens. The novel was named a 2007 ] ''Notable Book for Teens'' by the ] Committee,<ref: -->
448:
254:
52:
468:
Not inherently. But some editors (as I did) would have automatically assumed that 68.38.12.54 (the anonymous person who started the article) and
211:
976:''Kiss Me, I'm Dead'' (originally released under the title ''The Unresolved'') was nominated for a ]—YALSA 2007 ''Teens' Top Ten'',<ref: -->
121:
342:
Under your definition of "Notable", the terms Internet or Blog would not have been permitted within Knowledge until they became mainstream.
116:
722:
289:
216:
42:
980:
which recognized only six works in Jewish teen literature in 2007. The novel was also nominated for the 2006 ''Cybils''<ref: -->
1105:
Edit: Ive closed the discussion anyway as nothing fruitful was being added by others... Though its stilll there to browse. :) --
974:
Sandom is the author of nine novels. Ranked one of the Top Ten Children's Books of 2006 by the ''Washington Post'',<ref: -->
787:
760:
752:
654:
603:
365:
I've noticed that your username is Sandom and that you are editing an article about yourself. That poses a huge problem as the
674:
599:
126:
477:
264:
927:, and the fact that they are "anonymous" does not give you the right to treat them as if they have some hidden agenda.--
867:
783:
622:
articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
472:
were one and the same. Anoymous accounts don't have much credibility around here. But since you've provided third-party
460:
101:
38:
34:
326:, it was deleted because the term is currently non-notable. For more about what qualifies as notable on Knowledge, see
871:
144:
549:
473:
187:
169:
164:
803:
795:
768:
629:
557:
111:
953:
First, let me thank you, Mr. Heaphy, for your reasonable response. I really appreciate your note and its tone.
670:
564:
521:
594:
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article
662:
658:
366:
159:
863:
578:
create this page. Therefore, I was observing the protocol in the alert box. Frankly, I'd rather not spend
409:
304:
106:
294:
259:
799:
764:
327:
244:
984:'']'' said, "(J.G. Sandom) writes with a precision and delicacy unusual for YA fiction,"<ref: -->
1065:
909:
855:
561:
518:
299:
221:
1078:
1038:
1022:
987:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/19/AR2008061903291.html</ref: -->
985:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/17/AR2006081701208.html</ref: -->
975:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/08/AR2006120800009.html</ref: -->
697:
669:
For information on how to contribute to Knowledge when you have conflict of interest, please see
584:
533:
500:
469:
452:
424:
398:
382:
249:
96:
67:
51:
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to
982:
literary awards, and for the 2007 ''Best Books for Young Adults'' (BBYA) by the ].<ref: -->
824:
715:
708:
683:
1110:
1096:
839:
323:
1010:
932:
879:
830:
729:
1058:
902:
851:
639:
485:
481:
349:
331:
149:
544:
924:
859:
835:
490:
414:
372:
226:
154:
57:
820:
791:
748:
679:
595:
553:
511:
359:
850:
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's
847:—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
696:
should I bother to edit this article for accuracy again. Thanks for the advice.
1106:
1092:
638:
to the Knowledge article or website of your organization in other articles (see
990:
https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/jg-sandom-2/the-wave-2/</ref: -->
812:
778:
1006:
928:
875:
983:
http://www.ala.org/ala/yalsa/teenreading/teenstopten/ttt2007.pdf</ref: -->
673:. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see
344:
That's exactly right. The thing to keep in mind here is that Knowledge is an
743:
590:
979:
http://www.jewishlibraries.org/ajlweb/awards/st_books.htm</ref: -->
281:
977:
http://www.ala.org/ala/yalsa/teenreading/teenreading.cfm</ref: -->
862:
for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant
1100:
1086:
1072:
1046:
1030:
1014:
936:
916:
883:
807:
772:
747:
Please do not add promotional material to Knowledge, as you did to
732:
687:
569:
552:
notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with
526:
504:
428:
401:
386:
352:
334:
71:
1077:
Please, be careful, Jim! Drive (or have your driver drive) safe.
788:
add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Knowledge
838:, which states that an editor must not perform more than three
632:
about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
198:
83:
24:
811:
725:
at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
707:
280:
532:
standards. Activity on this page seems to be increasing.
829:
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being
870:. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary
517:
Do not remove csd template without giving a reason.
761:a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion
986:and called the novel, "a subtle gem."<ref: -->
994:If this works for you, I will cease and desist.
854:to work toward making a version that represents
721:Message added 17:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC). You can
845:even if you don't violate the three-revert rule
370:autobiography being nominated for deletion. --
692:To Seresin: This makes eminent sense. I will
41:. If you decide that you need help, check out
653:relevant policies and guidelines, especially
8:
759:acceptable, Knowledge is not intended to be
823:shows that you are currently engaged in an
714:Hello, Sandom. You have new messages at
7:
755:about beliefs, products or services
943:response to Not an anonymous editor
412:. I've done so for you already. --
45:, ask me on my talk page, or place
14:
43:Knowledge:Where to ask a question
777:
742:
589:
543:
834:—especially if you violate the
819:Your recent editing history at
602:. In keeping with Knowledge's
556:. If you continue, you will be
675:Knowledge:Conflict of Interest
1:
107:The five pillars of Knowledge
79:
20:
179:Getting more Knowledge rules
122:How to write a great article
37:to Knowledge! Thank you for
950:So, let me try this again.
901:Thanks for hearing me out.
212:New contributors' help page
136:Getting your info out there
1127:
505:18:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
429:18:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
402:17:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
387:17:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
353:17:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
335:16:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
227:Frequently Asked Questions
72:17:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
997:Thanking you in advance,
688:00:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
570:21:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
560:from editing Knowledge.
527:21:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
1101:06:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
1087:03:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
1082:
1073:02:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
1047:01:20, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
1042:
1031:16:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
1026:
1015:16:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
937:16:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
917:15:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
884:15:14, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
808:07:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
773:02:30, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
733:17:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
889:Not an anonymous editor
671:Knowledge:Business' FAQ
367:Knowledge:Autobiography
290:Pages needing attention
217:Where to ask a question
17:Welcome to Knowledge!!!
816:
712:
694:exercise great caution
613:exercise great caution
410:Knowledge:Cite_sources
285:
815:
786:. If you continue to
711:
655:neutral point of view
604:neutral point of view
548:Please stop removing
451:comment was added by
284:
150:Neutral Point of View
831:blocked from editing
796:blocked from editing
645:and you must always:
630:deletion discussions
600:conflict of interest
408:Follow the steps at
328:Knowledge:Notability
893:Hello J.G. Sandom,
858:among editors. See
265:Conflict resolution
868:dispute resolution
817:
784:disruptive editing
723:remove this notice
713:
684:wasn't he just...?
476:to establish your
286:
117:Be bold in editing
102:How to edit a page
97:Knowledge Tutorial
39:your contributions
1037:so, so terrible.
836:three-revert rule
782:Please stop your
716:Talk:J. G. Sandom
598:, you may have a
464:
320:
319:
316:
315:
312:
311:
274:Getting technical
195:
194:
145:Cite your sources
78:
77:
1118:
1070:
1068:Let's discuss it
1062:
991:
914:
912:Let's discuss it
906:
790:, as you did at
781:
746:
726:
593:
567:
547:
524:
503:
495:
446:
427:
419:
385:
377:
199:
170:Image use policy
165:Uploading images
84:
80:
70:
62:
49:
32:
25:
21:
1126:
1125:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1066:
1060:
1054:
973:
971:
945:
910:
904:
891:
872:page protection
800:TheOriginalSoni
765:TheOriginalSoni
753:objective prose
740:
727:
720:
705:
677:. Thank you.
651:avoid breaching
565:
550:speedy deletion
541:
522:
515:
493:
489:
447:—The preceding
437:
435:Editing Article
417:
413:
394:
375:
371:
363:
275:
255:Sign your posts
237:
204:
180:
137:
112:Manual of Style
89:
88:Getting Started
74:
60:
56:
47:
30:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1124:
1122:
1053:
1050:
1018:
1017:
970:
967:
944:
941:
940:
939:
890:
887:
739:
736:
719:
706:
704:
701:
667:
666:
648:
647:
646:
640:Knowledge:Spam
633:
623:
540:
537:
514:
509:
508:
507:
436:
433:
432:
431:
393:
392:Citing Sources
390:
362:
357:
356:
355:
318:
317:
314:
313:
310:
309:
308:
307:
302:
297:
292:
277:
276:
273:
270:
269:
268:
267:
262:
257:
252:
247:
239:
238:
235:
232:
231:
230:
229:
224:
219:
214:
206:
205:
202:
196:
193:
192:
191:
190:
188:Policy Library
182:
181:
178:
175:
174:
173:
172:
167:
162:
157:
152:
147:
139:
138:
135:
132:
131:
130:
129:
124:
119:
114:
109:
104:
99:
91:
90:
87:
76:
75:
53:sign your name
28:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1123:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1103:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1089:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1075:
1074:
1071:
1069:
1064:
1063:
1051:
1049:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1034:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1003:
1002:
1001:
998:
995:
992:
981:</ref: -->
968:
966:
962:
958:
954:
951:
948:
942:
938:
934:
930:
926:
921:
920:
919:
918:
915:
913:
908:
907:
898:
894:
888:
886:
885:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
848:
846:
841:
837:
833:
832:
826:
822:
814:
810:
809:
805:
801:
797:
794:, you may be
793:
789:
785:
780:
775:
774:
770:
766:
763:. Thank you.
762:
758:
754:
750:
745:
737:
735:
734:
731:
724:
717:
710:
702:
700:
699:
695:
690:
689:
686:
685:
681:
676:
672:
664:
663:autobiography
660:
659:verifiability
656:
652:
649:
644:
643:
641:
637:
634:
631:
627:
626:participating
624:
621:
618:
617:
616:
614:
610:
605:
601:
597:
592:
587:
586:
583:the subject.
581:
577:
572:
571:
568:
563:
559:
555:
551:
546:
538:
536:
535:
529:
528:
525:
520:
513:
510:
506:
502:
501:
498:
497:
496:
487:
483:
479:
475:
471:
467:
466:
465:
462:
458:
454:
450:
443:
440:
434:
430:
426:
425:
422:
421:
420:
411:
407:
406:
405:
403:
400:
391:
389:
388:
384:
383:
380:
379:
378:
368:
361:
358:
354:
351:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
336:
333:
329:
325:
306:
303:
301:
298:
296:
293:
291:
288:
287:
283:
279:
278:
272:
271:
266:
263:
261:
258:
256:
253:
251:
248:
246:
243:
242:
241:
240:
236:Getting along
234:
233:
228:
225:
223:
220:
218:
215:
213:
210:
209:
208:
207:
201:
200:
197:
189:
186:
185:
184:
183:
177:
176:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
160:Verifiability
158:
156:
155:Point of View
153:
151:
148:
146:
143:
142:
141:
140:
134:
133:
128:
125:
123:
120:
118:
115:
113:
110:
108:
105:
103:
100:
98:
95:
94:
93:
92:
86:
85:
82:
81:
73:
69:
68:
65:
64:
63:
54:
50:
44:
40:
36:
27:
26:
23:
22:
16:
1104:
1090:
1076:
1067:
1059:
1055:
1035:
1033:J.G. Sandom
1019:
1000:J.G. Sandom
999:
996:
993:
972:
963:
959:
955:
952:
949:
946:
911:
903:
899:
895:
892:
849:
844:
828:
821:J. G. Sandom
818:
792:J. G. Sandom
776:
756:
749:J. G. Sandom
741:
728:
693:
691:
678:
668:
650:
635:
625:
619:
612:
608:
596:J. G. Sandom
588:
579:
575:
573:
554:J. G. Sandom
542:
530:
516:
512:J._G._Sandom
499:
492:
491:
456:
444:
441:
438:
423:
416:
415:
404:J.G. Sandom
395:
381:
374:
373:
364:
360:J._G._Sandom
346:encyclopedia
345:
341:
330:. Thanks. --
321:
305:Village pump
203:Getting Help
127:WikiProjects
66:
59:
58:
46:
864:noticeboard
698:User:Sandom
585:User:Sandom
534:User:Sandom
470:User:Sandom
295:Peer review
260:Wikipedians
925:good faith
730:kelapstick
539:March 2008
478:notability
439:Netsnipe:
340:You said:
245:Wikiquette
48:{{helpme}}
856:consensus
852:talk page
494:Netsnipe
418:Netsnipe
376:Netsnipe
350:Fang Aili
332:Fang Aili
300:Utilities
222:Help Desk
61:Netsnipe
866:or seek
843:warring—
825:edit war
751:. While
738:May 2013
703:Talkback
461:contribs
449:unsigned
250:Civility
840:reverts
680:seresin
636:linking
620:editing
558:blocked
486:WP:VAIN
482:WP:AUTO
474:sources
35:Welcome
1107:Nbound
1093:Nbound
1079:Sandom
1061:Cullen
1039:Sandom
1023:Sandom
969:Author
905:Cullen
661:, and
615:when:
566:(talk)
523:(talk)
453:Sandom
399:Sandom
31:Sandom
29:Hello
1007:Bbb23
929:Bbb23
876:Bbb23
609:avoid
488:. --
397:like.
324:Bloap
1111:talk
1097:talk
1083:talk
1043:talk
1027:talk
1011:talk
933:talk
880:talk
804:talk
769:talk
562:STTW
519:STTW
484:and
457:talk
322:Re:
1052:DRN
989:-->
874:.
860:BRD
798:.
642:);
628:in
611:or
580:any
576:not
463:) .
445:J.
1113:)
1099:)
1085:)
1045:)
1029:)
1013:)
935:)
882:)
827:.
806:)
771:)
757:is
682:|
657:,
459:•
33:!
1109:(
1095:(
1081:(
1041:(
1025:(
1009:(
931:(
878:(
802:(
767:(
718:.
665:.
455:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.