Talk:Joseph C. Decuir

someone else set up a stub for me. I need to learn what I can and can't do.

The stub: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_C._Decuir The bottom of the page describes this as a stub. It is possible to turn it into a real page, but I don't understand the process yet. I am the subject of the article. My wife found it a few days ago. I believe it was created a few months ago by someone at the IEEE. (www.ieee.org) Not knowing any better, I added a few engineering related facts: why I became a Fellow, other contributions to public engineering standards. (All these edits are provably true.) She then added a couple other facts, mostly family. I then got another message from Uncle Milty. It pointed to the conflicts of interest page, etc. Please advise how to proceed? JoeDecuir (talk) 01:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello JoeDecuir -- Your problem is not that the article is a stub. The problem is that the article appears to be written by its subject, which a conflict of interest WP:COI. Lemme work on it and see what happens. Don't you touch it, OK? Rhadow (talk) 01:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello JoeDecuir -- First, have a look at the page about you. Second, find some nifty web references to you that prove your achievements. It is okay if they are behind an IEEE paywall. Third, put them on your talk page. Fourth, tell the truth that you don't know me or care to know me. The rest will happen magically. Signed, your magician, Rhadow (talk) 02:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

It is best for you not to edit the page, JoeDecuir. Wikipedia:Simple COI request explains how you can request changes to it if there are inaccuracies or you want material to be added. In its present state, the article is likely to be deleted because it does not cite enough sources and therefore does not establish the notability of you as an encyclopedia subject, so if you know of any published sources about you, please do suggest them. See WP:42 for a brief explanation of how notability is judged here. Cordless Larry (talk) 05:33, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello JoeDecuir -- You said your mission was to learn. Your case stands as an object lesson about an organization that is radically open. Within the boundaries of WP, there is no privacy. Every post is retained and visible. Even what you did in your sandbox three years ago is available. There are no private messages. To use the language of your field, there are no black boxes. The article about you lived happily for three months, enjoying security by obscurity. Now, with attention, the format of the article has improved, but it also has been dinged for notability and quality of sources about a living person. That's for your benefit, you know. Otherwise people could write complete fiction about you. Your facts may be right, but neither your identity nor a third party to vouch for them, can be confirmed.

The boundaries of the WP system are more interesting. Your userid or mine allows a straightforward mapping of WP identity to real-world identity. Straightforward does not mean foolproof. That's one reason JoeDecuir is not accepted as an authority on Joseph C. Decuir. At the boundary of WP and the real world, person Able may have multiple WP identities, Alpha, Bravo, and Delta, which he can use for nefarious purposes.

Now the onus is on you, sorry. The text of your nomination to IEEE would be a good place to start. I suspect it is behind a paywall. Are there other articles about you? Your name in the frontispiece of a GSM manual is a primary source, but I still like it. Being an author of a paper I can find in Google Scholar would be great. The best is an article about you in some reputable magazine. Linked-in is irrelevant. You can write anything you want there. Let the learning continue! Rhadow (talk) 10:34, 31 July 2017 (UTC)