User talk:Tomholladay

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Benjamin Ben Holladay

Hi!! I think you mean that you wrote Benjamin "Ben" Holladay. I'm sure the article is verifiable, but Ben Holladay already exists with much of the information, so I believe your information should be merged into that article, and your original article should become a redirect. Someone else nominated it for deletion; I finished his nomination but do not agree with it - I believe the articles should be merged. Srose (talk) 13:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree the two should be merged under the title Benjamin "Ben" Holladay. Is this how I reply? Tom

[edit] Phil McGraw

Dear Tom, I've removed the information about the lawsuit you added back into the article. If you'll please see the talk page, information like this simply cannot be added to an article about a living person per policy. This policy is not to be taken lightly, negative, unsourced and possibly defamatory statements cannot be placed into articles unless they are cited thoroughly with multiple reliable, third-party sources. Please review these policies, so you'll understand the issue. Thanks. Ariel♥Gold 04:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

If the lawsuit on supplements can be there why can't the kalpoe lawsuit in california. It is a matter of public record and the subject matter covered on two mcgraw shows. if you persist in this policy all the living person articles will be be inane vanity pieces! that can't be right! Tom

it is all verifiable on his program and in the press. who has to verify it you or me. the suit exists in a california court. the events that led to the suit occurred on mcgraw's show.

All living person biographies should be sourced with reliable, third-party sources as policy states. This means no forums, no tabloids, no fan sites, just reliable, news stories written about the person in question. If you cannot find sources to back up your claims, they are original research, it is not verifiable, and cannot remain in the article. These policies are quite clear, please review them. Cheers! Ariel♥Gold 05:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

i can find lots of sources. what do you want. two doctor phil shows, press report on the lawsuit? this is all very well known and quite a serious matter.

http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.docs/Menu15.html

Not a reliable source. Ariel♥Gold

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4ApXA7XBb8

Not a reliable source, and it is a copyright violation as well as not abiding by the external links guideline which states links that require applications such as video or audio shouldn't be used except to specifically illustrate a video or audio that isn't copyrighted. Ariel♥Gold

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELxTwuoveLA&mode=related&search=

Not a reliable source, and it is a copyright violation as well as not abiding by the external links guideline which states links that require applications such as video or audio shouldn't be used except to specifically illustrate a video or audio that isn't copyrighted. Ariel♥Gold

http://scrux.com/natalee/deepakconfession.htm

Not a reliable source. Ariel♥Gold

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4ApXA7XBb8

Not a reliable source, and it is a copyright violation as well as not abiding by the external links guideline which states links that require applications such as video or audio shouldn't be used except to specifically illustrate a video or audio that isn't copyrighted. Ariel♥Gold

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236558,00.html

This is the only source that is reliable, and this can be used, if properly written, and cited. I'd be willing to do this for you if you like. I don't even know who this Phil person is, so I have no vested interest in seeing it added or removed, I simply am explaining policy to you. I'm quite familiar with how to place citations into templates, and how to word things like this neutrally, so if you'd like me to do so, I would be happy to. Ariel♥Gold 05:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict -Ariel's right on the money.) Sorry to butt in, but per WP:BLP unsourced or poorly sourced content must be removed immediately. The only source that even comes close to being a WP:RS is the Fox news.com page. Now it will need to be carefully written and attributed per WP:CITE. The content here was written as if the allegations and claims were fact. That's highly inappropriate. Dreadstar † 05:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

fine lets go with a citation based on the fox news source. i don't understand how verbatim recordings of programs are not a reliable source even if a copyright violation. you have seen them and can see them on the internet. do i have to order an original video and send it to you? the website cited has copies of original court documents. did you look?

This doesn't matter, please read the copyright policy. These are not your videos to distribute for informational purposes, and since they can't be distributed freely, they can't be used as verification. Would you like me to write the section based on the FOX News article? I'll be happy to do so, but unless other reliable sources (like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, BBC, Associated Press, etc.,) can be found, this is the only source that can be added. Information must be verifiable, so this is the only source that covers WP:RS and WP:V. Ariel♥Gold 05:50, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


here is the original complaint filed in court. http://homepage.mac.com/mcgraw.kalpoe.docs/.Public/Kalpoe_v_McGraw/1127666911.PDF


Again, this has issues as the source requires an external application, see the external links guideline again. Not everyone can read .pdf documents. While they can be used, they should only be used when multiple other sources are there to verify the information. I can, however, put that in the external links section (which makes it an optional item, not something that specifically is verifying a passage in the article). However, this page can be used just to source the fact that the lawsuit exists. Again, great care needs to be taken with biographies of living persons. I hope you can understand and respect these policies. Ariel♥Gold 05:50, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


How would you produce an original court document on wikipedia? with a link to the actual court? this is a matter of public record. could one place the entire text in the article as filed with the court? these rules enable living persons, public figures and politicians, to use wikipedia to place vanity articles about themselves without the possibility of editing. i understand the principle but i have concerns about the practical results.
Please use colons to indent, don't place a space before your comments, or they result in the preformat boxes that you see, and those do not wrap, so the text isn't readable. Just use a colon to start a sentence, to indent. As for reproducing entire documents, that is just not done here. See What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias do not reproduce entire court documents when writing about a court case. To see an example, see Roe vs. Wade. As I said, the documents can be added to external links, but not used as references except sparingly, and when accompanied by multiple other sources to back up the information for those readers who do not have any way to read a .pdf file. I really would encourage you to read all these policies and guidelines, all the words that are blue link to the pages that fully explain these issues, and would be really helpful for understanding why things are the way they are on Wikipedia. You have not answered if you'd like me to add the information to the article, so could you let me know if you want me to do it? I can guarantee if I do it, it will comply with the guidelines and policies. Ariel♥Gold 06:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

i did answer that it is ok with me. i have now written a new entry based on the information in the verifiable sources.

And yet, again you did not cite the sources. I'm removing this and I'll re-write it, using only information available in the article, and place it in an appropriate section that complies with the manual of style. Ariel♥Gold 06:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

do i cite sources in the text?

I really do urge you to click on the blue words that are peppered throughout this page, they lead to all the relevant policies and guidelines. As I said above, you have to cite sources, using manual of style citations, known as footnotes. I'm working on it now, but I'd encourage you to read those pages to learn more :o) Ariel♥Gold 06:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


Looks good. I corrected the spelling of Holloway and Natalee. Thanks. I think the headline should read Kalpoe lawsuit. Holloways filed a wrongful death suit which was denied on venue issues. l read up. I know what a footnote is. Just don't know how to post them.

I did some more work on the article (and yeah I saw the spelling errors but you got them before me lol), non-WP:MOS stuff irks me when I find it, so I tend to fix it when I run across it. I put all his books into templates and moved the section down, I removed multiple non-reliable sources (TV.com, IMDB, blogs, forums) from the trivia section (but that entire section really needs to be nuked, and the relevant information added as prose into the article itself), and formatted all the references to be standard, as well as some other misc. stuff. Thank you for your patience, and understanding. Cheers! Ariel♥Gold 07:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

thank you for the education. i have not seen such due diligence here before. how did you come upon this?

How did I come upon Wikipedia? Hrmm, I really don't remember, it was back in 2003 sometime, when Wikipedia was still quite young (and a lot smaller! lol). I watched, read, learned, and just enjoy it. I learn a lot just from doing Recent Changes patrol (which is how I came across the Dr. Phil article anyway, I noticed a large chunk of text added without sources), or from hitting "Random page", or from just reading things like WP:AFD, etc. Pretty fun place, but there's a lot to learn, every day I think I still learn something new, after all this time, lol. Ariel♥Gold 07:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Morse L. Holladay

The article Morse L. Holladay has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia is not a memorial site. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


Deleted again -- this person does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for biographical notability. Please don't repost. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Per the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history:

"In general, a topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

In particular, the following types of individuals will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify:

   * Recipients of a country's highest military decoration.
   * People who commanded a substantial body of troops (such as an army or fleet, or a significant portion of one) in combat.
   * Holders of top-level command positions (such as Chief of the General Staff).
   * People who are the primary topic of one or more published secondary works.

Conversely, any person who is only mentioned in genealogical records or family histories, or is traceable only through primary documents, is probably not notable."

Per your article, Morse Holladay won the Navy Cross, which is the second-highest ranking naval decoration, and was covered in one local newspaper article. That doesn't meet the above guidelines. If you can find other reliable independent sources showing Morse's notability, let me know. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 20:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)