Testing.....1, 2.....
Please cite your additions to the Anna Schmidt article or remove the information. Potentially damaging information about her not seeing her father or the custody change definitely needs to be referenced. Where did you see this? -- Bookworm857158367 14:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm new at this, and was unable to find (maybe i didn't look in the correct places) how to make a citation if one's reference is the actual individual being written about. What i'm trying to say, is that Anna is my reference.....so i am pretty confident that what i say is truth. Is there a way to cite this? Any help would be appreciated....thanks!! crocodyle 18:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance and adding the citation. crocodyle 02:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If you're her stepfather, I'm sure your statement would count as well or any other corrections you want to make to names, facts, dates, etc. If anyone would know, you would. I was going off the news article I found (and cited at the bottom of the page) called "Baby Jessica updates." "The family" being referred to was apparently Schmidt and Anna. By all means, change that back to just Dan Schmidt, if you want. Someone requested an article on this case last year; I spotted the request, did the research and looked up the articles. The 2003 article was the most recent one I could find. I was attempting to present both sides as fairly as possible. There's a board called "living persons notice board" that should be referenced at the top of the Anna Schmidt discussion page. Go there and pose the question and the administrators who oversee that should be able to tell you how to go about submitting your statement. I know it's possible based on the Ryan St. Anne Scott article I referred you to earlier. --Bookworm857158367 13:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed the message and will watch for an answer. Thanks! crocodyle 18:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It looks to me like the person mentioned above referenced his own statement from what he wrote on his Wikipedia TALK page (see Talk:Ryan St. Anne Scott)...which is not from a source "outside" of Wikipedia, such as "≈ jossi ≈" answers to you on the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. crocodyle 04:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Anna and her younger sister Chloe both currently live with their mother, Cara, and have not been in contact with their father since March 2006. crocodyle 04:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I didn't change the title of the article. Apparently one of the administrators decided the title was inappropriate and didn't want to leave in information without a reference. They feel it infringes on the privacy of someone who isn't a public person to have a biography article using her name on Wikipedia. The case itself is notable. I don't know why the owner of Wikipedia didn't write you back. You probably should bring it up again on that Biography of Living Persons message board if you want to make more changes. -- Bookworm857158367 12:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
What I think this administrator is saying is that the article should be reworked. I wrote it more like a newspaper feature, trying to look at how it affected the people on both sides, and they're saying it needs to be more like an overview of the case and less like a biography. The only problem the administrator had with the info you added is that there isn't a way to verify it without a book or a newspaper article that can be cited as a source. Your court records are sealed. Hopefully, the Wikipedia owner will let you submit your statement as a source. What if you weren't who you say you are, but someone who was writing lies about Anna? You'd want those things removed right away, right? The new version of the article should address topics like children's rights and parent's rights and how this case changed family law. I don't have the book that he's mentioning that should be used as a reference, but someone out there probably does and can write it from that perspective. Wikipedia's strength and weakness is that it has a lot of editors. It might be preferable to remove a lot of the biographical detail from that article about EVERYONE and start over, which I can do or you can do. What changes should be made or what should be deleted? -- Bookworm857158367 14:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I understand what the administrator was trying to say....and i didn't object to changing the article's name....BUT what i did object to was the fact that certain things NOT pertaining to the actual case were left in, while what i put in was supposedly unacceptable because "it had nothing to do with the actual case". Your removal of most of what i felt wasn't any more related to the case than my input.....was the right thing to do....nice work. I can also understand why you have doubts as to who i am, but i did send a copy of our (Cara and I) marriage license in with my letter to info-en@wikipedia.org. I'm not an expert on marriage licenses, but i don't think anyone other than us actually have or can obtain the original copy...although the person at the info-en location now has a copy....so who knows. And that doesn't help you to know who i really am, so it is understandable. When i first stumbled across the article and showed my wife, she wasn't happy....wondering why it had to be put in at all....and why everyone always distorted the facts/truth of what really happened. Most of what she objected to is no longer in the article....and it has been made an article about the case, not an individual....so it's time for me to quit nagging and move on. Thanks for your help and work... crocodyle 01:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Testing.....1, 2.....
Please cite your additions to the Anna Schmidt article or remove the information. Potentially damaging information about her not seeing her father or the custody change definitely needs to be referenced. Where did you see this? -- Bookworm857158367 14:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm new at this, and was unable to find (maybe i didn't look in the correct places) how to make a citation if one's reference is the actual individual being written about. What i'm trying to say, is that Anna is my reference.....so i am pretty confident that what i say is truth. Is there a way to cite this? Any help would be appreciated....thanks!! crocodyle 18:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance and adding the citation. crocodyle 02:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If you're her stepfather, I'm sure your statement would count as well or any other corrections you want to make to names, facts, dates, etc. If anyone would know, you would. I was going off the news article I found (and cited at the bottom of the page) called "Baby Jessica updates." "The family" being referred to was apparently Schmidt and Anna. By all means, change that back to just Dan Schmidt, if you want. Someone requested an article on this case last year; I spotted the request, did the research and looked up the articles. The 2003 article was the most recent one I could find. I was attempting to present both sides as fairly as possible. There's a board called "living persons notice board" that should be referenced at the top of the Anna Schmidt discussion page. Go there and pose the question and the administrators who oversee that should be able to tell you how to go about submitting your statement. I know it's possible based on the Ryan St. Anne Scott article I referred you to earlier. --Bookworm857158367 13:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed the message and will watch for an answer. Thanks! crocodyle 18:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It looks to me like the person mentioned above referenced his own statement from what he wrote on his Wikipedia TALK page (see Talk:Ryan St. Anne Scott)...which is not from a source "outside" of Wikipedia, such as "≈ jossi ≈" answers to you on the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. crocodyle 04:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Anna and her younger sister Chloe both currently live with their mother, Cara, and have not been in contact with their father since March 2006. crocodyle 04:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I didn't change the title of the article. Apparently one of the administrators decided the title was inappropriate and didn't want to leave in information without a reference. They feel it infringes on the privacy of someone who isn't a public person to have a biography article using her name on Wikipedia. The case itself is notable. I don't know why the owner of Wikipedia didn't write you back. You probably should bring it up again on that Biography of Living Persons message board if you want to make more changes. -- Bookworm857158367 12:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
What I think this administrator is saying is that the article should be reworked. I wrote it more like a newspaper feature, trying to look at how it affected the people on both sides, and they're saying it needs to be more like an overview of the case and less like a biography. The only problem the administrator had with the info you added is that there isn't a way to verify it without a book or a newspaper article that can be cited as a source. Your court records are sealed. Hopefully, the Wikipedia owner will let you submit your statement as a source. What if you weren't who you say you are, but someone who was writing lies about Anna? You'd want those things removed right away, right? The new version of the article should address topics like children's rights and parent's rights and how this case changed family law. I don't have the book that he's mentioning that should be used as a reference, but someone out there probably does and can write it from that perspective. Wikipedia's strength and weakness is that it has a lot of editors. It might be preferable to remove a lot of the biographical detail from that article about EVERYONE and start over, which I can do or you can do. What changes should be made or what should be deleted? -- Bookworm857158367 14:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I understand what the administrator was trying to say....and i didn't object to changing the article's name....BUT what i did object to was the fact that certain things NOT pertaining to the actual case were left in, while what i put in was supposedly unacceptable because "it had nothing to do with the actual case". Your removal of most of what i felt wasn't any more related to the case than my input.....was the right thing to do....nice work. I can also understand why you have doubts as to who i am, but i did send a copy of our (Cara and I) marriage license in with my letter to info-en@wikipedia.org. I'm not an expert on marriage licenses, but i don't think anyone other than us actually have or can obtain the original copy...although the person at the info-en location now has a copy....so who knows. And that doesn't help you to know who i really am, so it is understandable. When i first stumbled across the article and showed my wife, she wasn't happy....wondering why it had to be put in at all....and why everyone always distorted the facts/truth of what really happened. Most of what she objected to is no longer in the article....and it has been made an article about the case, not an individual....so it's time for me to quit nagging and move on. Thanks for your help and work... crocodyle 01:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)