User talk:Thesociologist
Welcome to Wikipedia! We could really use your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as Structural corruption and organized crime in the chilld protection system) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Perel 08:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia! We could really use your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as STRUCTURAL CORRUPTION AND ORGANIZED CRIME IN THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Perel 08:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
First and foremost, welcome to Wikipedia.
If you're concerned that an article was unfairly deleted, please consider taking the topic to Deletion Review, which serves as an appeals process for deleted articles. Also, please keep in mind that Perel merely tagged your article - an administrator deleted it upon reading the article and deciding it met the speedy deletion criteria. To find out who deleted your article, please take a look at the deletion log.
Finally, I was concerned by the tone of your comments. Please remember that text doesn't carry the same cues as voice, and that statements intended to be reasonable can come across in text as uncivil. One of the core tenets of Wikipedia is to assume good faith - please keep that in mind when leaving messages for other editors.
If you have any questions, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Mytildebang 04:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- It is also important to recognise that in Wikipedia every Editor is autonomous, though all share the same risk as you of having their articles modified or deleted. There is no such thing in Wikipedia as a Supervisor.--Anthony.bradbury 12:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome to Wikipedia. After listening to the CBS Sunday Morning piece on Wikipedia I spent the rest of Sunday summarizing the Congressional Evidence book I wrote on organized crime in the child protection, mental health and social work systems. I did this because of the comments on the show about the need for quality articles. Whether it was "Perel" or someone else who rejected the article, among the reasons cited were that it was "nonsense" and did not have historical content. To be polite, neither of those observations have any correspondence to reality.
I own and run a business. I do not have time to monitor Wikipedia or invest anymore time attempting to justify an article that should never have been rejected in the first place. I am responding because someone who does monitor Wikipedia was nice enough to e-mail me that your "Welcome" and other comments had been posted on my talk page.
What I did do is write and mail a 12 page letter to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors and key administrators. I also copied Larry Sanger because my experience confirms some of his criticisms. The issue of whether or not I should be treated as an expert is irrelevant. The fundamental problem is that Wikipedia does not have uniform protocols for distinguishing material that accurately describes reality from material which does not. That problem was solved by Sir Karl Popper about 1929. The United States Supreme Court adopted Popper's criteria in the landmark decision Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals.
My field happens to be sociology of knowledge. I have made some advances in the field that are the basis of my business, including a holographic paradigm theory of the structure and function of social processes that allow social processes, including knowledge processes, to be described mathematically. The theory and mathematical descriptors took me about fourteen years to develop and confirm the logic. I know what I am talking about. I use methodology derived from what I developed to analyze evidence in criminal proceedings. Every case in which I personally did the evidence analysis that went to trial resulted in a "Not Guilty" verdict.
Check out my web site, which includes my Curriculum Vitae, at www.thesociologycenter.com. If you would like a copy of the content of the letter I mailed the Wikipedia Board, request a copy at thesociologist@adelphia.net and I will send you exactly what I e-mailed Larry Sanger.
Thank you for being nice enough to try and communicate with me about my submission.
Thesociologist 15:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)James Roger Brown