Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem to me that Billy Byars Jr. meets these criteria, I have started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.
Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Byars Jr.. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.
Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, an administrator will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article.
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Billy Byars Jr., is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. One Night In Hackney20:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you make any further edits like this one, this account will be blocked. Do not add poorly-sourced or unsourced potentially libelous material to Wikipedia articles about living people. Jkelly21:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As you claim to still be learning about Wikipedia, let me give you a few pointers:
1. Do not shift article talk to your user page. That is not what the user talk page is for. The whole point of having talk pages on articles is to facilitate discussion of the article there.
Then why are you commenting on the article here?
2. AfDs: The point of an AfD is not for you to refute every single person who makes a comment, and thereby "win". The point of AfD is to open commentary on an article that someone deemed unfit for WP. You should make one or maybe two comments (one being your vote, and any other when something really off base might need to be explained. You don't "win" an AfD, no matter what; it is up to community consensus, not your personal opinion.
I think you should read the post by one of the founders of Wiki, Mr Sanders?, that I posted earlier. Your above comments are exactly what he is talking about.
3. Wikipedia policies: You need to read all of a given policy, not just the piece that suits your argument. In general, Wikipedia does not allow original research, which is defined loosely as anything not printed by a third party. (See WP:OR). There are also policies governing the reliability of sources (WP:RS). There's also WP:NPOV, which explains what neutral point of view means as far as WP is concerned. There's also WP:BLP, which governs articles on living people, and WP:NN for notability guidelines, WP:FRINGE for fringe theories, and probably a few other that might be appropriate to this situation. The important thing to note is that these policies do not function in a vacuum; they interact with one another, and therefore, while an article may meet one requirement, it may not meet all of them.
You joined the article discussion about 90% of the way in and then make comments which have already been rehashed over and over and settled. I and everyone else is aware of all of the above. Just what is your point? Also, "NPOV" and "FRINGE" have nothing to do with any article I have written. Don't just take a quick glance at a very lengthy discussion and make uninformed assumptions.
4. User conduct: There are also policies on user conduct. For one, I notice you aren't using four tildes to sign your posts, which is a basic item of Wikiquette - people need to know who has said something, and when. There is also a policy governing disrupting WP to make a point (WP:POINT), which seems to be what you are doing through your behavior in relation to the Billy Byars AfD. You have over 100 edits on WP already, 95% of which are either to the article, to the AfD page, or your complaint on ANI related to the AfD. The other 5% are for another AfD which was a bad faith nomination. While WP is "the encyclopedia anyone can edit", there are policies and procedures in place to handle users who are overly problematic, and you are clearly leaning towards that category, if not already in it. If you wish to be a positive contributor, you can learn from your mistakes. If not, you'll certainly be blocked sooner or later if your current conduct continues. MSJapan03:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have almost always made tildes to sign my name. If one or two are missing out of 100 it is simply an accident. The vast majority of my edits are simple puncuation and grammar corrections due to my lousy typing. Your only post to any discussion that I have been involved in clearly showed that you didn't read the article being discussed. You made some bizarre statement about "two years of research about Usenet quotes". Absolutely no one in the discussion knew what you were talking about. You then attributed a nonsensible fact to a magazine article that didn't state any such thing. When these issues were pointed out to you, you never returned to the discussion to aknowlege your mistake. This can only show that you are trolling articles and attempting to start personl flame wars. This is not acceptable and you need to stop or you will be blocked.Ballog04:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Ballog[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I remind you of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy for editors, which you appear to have violated at Billy Byars Jr.. You must not add negative statements to a biography without sourcing them. Thank you. One Night In Hackney 19:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
