User talk:Ton-Metallicon

The article Tamara Bane Gallery was deleted after a deletion debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamara Bane Gallery. Please do not recreate it.--Scott Mac (Doc) 21:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from Talk:Tamara Bane Gallery Scott - you told my clients (Sorayama & his agent) that the page would be held open for us to re-create it. There is no craziness at all in this. It is a straight reporting of the litigation. Ton-Metallicon (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)Ton-Metallicon[reply]

From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: 12/11/2009 11:35:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time Subj: Re: [Ticket#2009112710008397] http://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Google&lang=en&q=Tamara_Bane_Galler

Dear John,

Thank you for your email.

OK, we'll keep the page open for you.

Yours sincerely, Joe Daly

Ton-Metallicon (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)Ton-Metallicon[reply]

OK, there seems to have been a misunderstanding here. I'm not at all sure why a volunteer at the e-mail team told you that, and I've asked that they get back to you. However, decisions about articles are not made by a central authority you can appeal to, they are made by the community of users here. That community has decided to delete the article in question - and you should not recreate it. People who have a personal interest in articles should not create articles about companies or people they are involved with. See oour policy on conflicts of interest and our policy on writing about yourself.

If the Tamara Bane Gallery merits an article, then hopefully someone without a conflict of interest will eventually decide to write one. After the problems with the previous article, that would need to be a regular user of Wikipedia who understands how things work here. In any case, even if someone were to do this the community may decide that the gallery does not meet the standards for inclusion in the encyclopedia (WP:CORP). I hope this helps, you may like to e-mail the volunteer team and ask them to clarify what they've told you.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS. You can reply to me, if you wish, by writing on this page. I will be watching it.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best way to handle it is probably to do a report on the case on a page devoted to the case, Hajime Sorayama v. Robert Bane. The article is amply footnoted and the only strong words about Bane and the gallery are from the court itself. It seems to me that only someone who reads the case materials (as I did at PACER) would be able to report on it. As it is, there is plenty of mis-reporting and misinformation going on across the net and it would be helpful to have an encyclopedic entry. I think it is a matter of public importance.

I don't have a personal stake in the outcome of the case. I was asked to write about it for a small fee and my only conditions were that I write it without interference and that each and every fact be evidenced in the court record. As a consequence there are various allegations that appeared on the old page that do not appear on the new page. I haven't earned and won't earn money from the litigation, I didn't and won't participate in it, and I have no connection to it or to the artist other than my free-lance reporting.

I hope you will consider these issues. All the content in my article is verifiable and there's no slant to it other than the words of the court. Please read it if you have any doubts.

Ton-Metallicon (talk) 23:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)Ton-Mettalicon[reply]

I would just like to add a comment regarding your conflict of interest page: "Where advancing outside interests are more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest."

I have stated what my interest is above and I firmly believe that I have far less stake in advancing outside interests than I do in advancing the aims of Wikipedia. If you look at the old page, you will see a lot of contentious argument that does not appear in my strict account of the case. My interest is reporting on the case in a truthful manner. Ton-Metallicon (talk) 23:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)Ton-Metallicon[reply]