User talk:Bob Fink

Welcome!

Hello, Bob Fink, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- RHaworth 09:30, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dupli- tripli- quadru-plication[edit]

Please decide whether you want your article to be Archaeology (music), Archaeology (Music), Music (archaeology) or Music (Archaeology) and then turn the titles you do not want into redirects. If you want this article to survive you must actually give it some content. Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. But do create an account and keep contributing! -- RHaworth 20:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken your recent edits to indicate that you want Music (archaeology) and have converted the others into redirects for you. Please learn how categories work - I see no need for Category:Music (archaeology) at this stage and have requested that it be deleted. I have also had to deduplicate Music (history) and Music (history of scale) - I will leave you to delete the triplication in Talk:Scale (music).

I hope that by now you have got the message - on Wikipedia we say things once and then create Wikilinks if we want to refer to the stuff from elsewhere. -- RHaworth 22:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing {{wikify}}. {{mergeto}}, etc. tags is vandalism. Any more of that Robert Fink and I fink I will nominate all your stuff for deletion on the grounds of vanity / original research. I am always suspicious of someone who describes themselves or their work as award winning. And get yourself a user id. -- RHaworth 10:29, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To Haworth from Bob Fink[edit]

Sorry -- didn't know that erasing your stuff after an edit was "vandalism." (*1 see below). Yikes!!

I don't know how to make a "redirect" or "merge" or reach you otherwise for direct help.

I thought the messages I got were "automatic" messages to me, anyway. Clicking on links to find out what's needed only referred me to lifelong reading that might or might not answer my need to figure out how to comply.

I am disabled and have limited pain-free hours per day to pursue my 50-year-long career in musicolgy, and about the origins of music, without starting a new career as a "wikipedian."

I also am crippled by town vs gown biases. [I am a "towner."]

Someone recently mistook me for another musicologist named Robert Fink, so I thought I'd make a page about me and clear up the confusion.

I have no idea what you want from me (e.g., "cleanup" "wikify"). I want only to inform people of my credentials, which you "suspect" because I have won some awards. I guess awards are bad.

Being picked as a juror by Nature journal, one of the world's leading scholarly science journals -- especially since I am from the town side of "town and gown" -- is no mean feat.

And now, without the time available even to pursue my own career, much less spend the scores of hours figuring out your encyclopedically monumental mass of confusing instructions and protocols about "Wikifying" myself, I don't think I can overcome those barriers to being heard, read, or part of the literature in my field within Wikipedia.

And I cannot make a new career of figuring out what work that requires or means for me. Sorry. But I barely have time for my own career. I am willing to comply but only up to a reasonable point.

I can prove every last word and comma of what I wrote about myself (and about my subject(s) on the origin of music, music archeaology or whatever keywords might refer to what I do). -- The write-up on me was copied from the Greenwich flyer for my books -- and my credentials are very true and accurate (*2).

"Vanity" is irrelevant to facts, anyway. Truth doesn't care who tells it, whether the vain, proud, humble, or the outcast.

I thought this Wikipedia would be useful to enable serious, honest and competent scholars who weren't recognized in the elite loop of the self-righteous pompous academic types (like Galileo suffered from, and Edison, and numerous others) -- to become known for their research and insights. Looks like you have more rules than I can overcome to get that benefit. ...Well, par for the course.

Now you want to erase (censor?) all my stuff? (*3) Too bad for me. And others, as it will leave the field remaining one-sided and out-dated.

All I wanted was for my research to be "found" by students or others seeking all sides of a story (using various keywords or subject searches), a story which I spend over 50 years of my life working on, and for which I finally was getting large amounts of recognition at last -- because new archaeologucal finds and studies have been confirming my life's views in spades. But it looks like I have't found the right place in Wikipedia to make into your own kind of insider "loop," due to your format fetishes.

Is that what you want?

If you really want to help, then Wikipedia HAS NOTHING about music archaeology (*4) other than reaching some band of musicians using that name. What's wrong with a simple search under "Music Archaeology" actually reaching THAT subject rather than reaching only a rock & roll pop group? There's little enough in that field, so you won't run out of memory, y'know?

In my life's work, after now being published finally in some of the mainstream scholarly journals, means that my contributions are a large part of the literature you want to erase.

Well -- either help us or erase us. At 70, I'm worn out and need to move on with my remaining life, if this place will get scholars like me nowhere.

--Best witches, Bob Fink 2005-10-14 01:06:37

From RHaworth:

Wikipedia is actually very forgiving of sincere but "non-standard" contributions. It is also a colaborative project. You don't actually need to know what "wikify" means - the {{wikify}} tag is put there as a signal to invite other editors to come and wikify the article for you. In removing the tag you are removing the request for the assistance which you are asking for here - very contradictory.
If your credentials are very true and accurate (and I do not question them), then there should be no need to pepper Bob Fink with peacock phrases such as now-famous, innumerable news articles, etc. They may be OK in a publisher's blurb but they do not go in a Wikipedia article.
You … want to erase (censor?) all my stuff. That is unfair - where have I said anything about erasing your stuff?
Wikipedia has nothing about music archaeology. Oh yes. The article on prehistoric music seems to cover the topic - and that has been around since Feb this year.

But as I always say, don't let me put you off. Keep contributing but please log in every time - note the "remember me" tab on the login screen. Best witches to you too, RHaworth 10:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding[edit]

I naturally assumed the template or your "signal to other editors" was actually a signal addressed to ME to wikify etc. Your signal was ambiguous, and you should look up unambiguous Finkjournalism for remedial instructions. :O)

If others want to conform what I write to wiki standards, that's probably ok with me. I will make the changes you suggest that I know how to make so far.

Your comment far above that you would "nominate" all my stuff for deletion sounded to me like "erase," but that seems like water under the bridge now.

Best, Bob Fink 204.83.156.36 10:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wikify is a standard template that I slap on several articles a day - I never actuallly read what it says! Unambiguous Finkjournalism is a broken link - where am I supposed to look it up? And please log in. -- RHaworth 11:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Citing oneself[edit]

The no original research policy does not bar you from citing your own works. However, the policy "in a nutshell" is that "all Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias."

The Wikipedia:Conflict of interest policy disallows "promotion of companies you work for and their products." "You may cite your own publications just as you'd cite anyone else's, but make sure your material is relevant and that you're regarded as a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. Be cautious about excessive citation of your own work, which may be seen as promotional or a conflict of interest. When in doubt, discuss on the talk page whether or not your citation is an appropriate one, and defer to the community's opinion."

The Wikipedia:Notability guideline describes that "a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the subject itself." I would assume that this holds for information as well, and that information from your published works must describe information which has been the subject of multiple works aside from your own.

When you cite yourself, you must follow the relevant policies and guidelines. You must be willing to succinctly defend the relevance, reliability, notability, and neutrality of the information you cite from your published works.

If you have questions you may reach me at User talk:Hyacinth. Hyacinth 11:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]