User talk:60.240.226.18

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome back, contributor formerly known as 60.240.228.100. Please stop vandalizing the Byron Kennedy article. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Byron Kennedy

Hi there, thanks for taking the time to contact me on my talk page. It's good to see your interest in the Byron Kennedy article, and your family relation definitely gives you a great position to supply correct information. But if I was to offer you any advice, it would be to slow down a little. (That can be hard, I know, but there will be time to get things right.) Maybe take a moment to look at a few other articles, like the George Miller link, or the Mad Max link, to get an idea of how most articles on Wikipedia look. You might also consider creating a user name, so people can get to know you a little, and see your contributions in more context. Maybe have a quick look at the tutorial.

Finally, (I hope I don't sound like I'm preaching), although your brother's article is personally important to you, many of the thousands of people here will edit your work simply on the basis of encyclopedic interest, and so may seem a little harsh. Don't be too discouraged, and please contact me again if I can be of any more help. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee(Leave msg.) 10:28, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Good morning. You may also want to visit the policy on autobiographies. While this isn't strictly an autobiography since you are editing an article about a family member, many of the same principles apply. It can be very difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view while editing. That's why most of us actively avoid editing articles about ourselves or close family members. Please also remember that while you claim to be a family member and we try to assume good faith, the anonymous nature of editing on the Internet makes it inherently difficult to verify your claim of being a family member. We have had vandals attempt to use that ploy in the past. It's unfortunate but it does tend to make us a bit suspicious.

If you do feel the need to correct factual points, it may be best in this case to leave your comment and the supporting evidence on the article's Talk page. Let a third party - someone disinterested in the debate - evaluate the claims and make the actual edits to the article. Rossami (talk) 13:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, yeah, I see it hasn't changed. But don't be surprised when it does. I'm sure you have the facts right, but the style of the page needs to be a lot closer to that of other pages. Someone will undoubtedly make changes - but that's what makes this place interesting. You never really own anything and just try to work towards improving things. Cheers. (Drop me a note when you manage to log in.) --Bookandcoffee(Leave msg.) 05:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)