LadyDeerskin

Please leave my service dog article alone

I just found that you had removed my article on service dogs for autism....please leave it alone, unless you know enough about the subject to put something better in its place. As someone who is on the autistic spectrum, who is a service dog user, and the parent of an autistic child who uses a service dog trained to assist him with it, and someone who does a great deal of work with parents with autistic children and their service dogs, I believe I have enough experience to address this subject here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LadyDeerskin (talk • contribs)

First of all, it's not "your" article, you have released it into the GFDL and anyone can edit it, see WP:OWN. Second, Wikipedia articles must be neutral in tone, and specifically aren't guides or essays on various topics, see WP:NOT. I have trimmed the article down to a workable, neutral, stub. Feel free to contribute to it, but you should remember that everything should be neutral, and preferably formatted properly. --W.marsh 14:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The author of an article *is* the owner...

I am the sole author of the article on Autism Service Dogs- no one else has contrbuted to it in any way, but you and others persist in removing it. Do you have a personal complaint against my writing style? I am sorry that i am not an accomplished an author as you believe yourself to be. I do happen to be autistic myself, but I do the best I can, and am trying to help others as well by furnishing info on a subject that is of immense importance to the disabled.

If Wikipedia is supposed to be a free, online encylopedia, that all can contrubute to, then why are you taking down articles of information that is useful to parents of autistic children, and other disabled people? Are you an expert in this field? There are few people in this country who are more experienced than I am in this subject, please refrain from tampering with this material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LadyDeerskin (talk • contribs)

Look, I encourage you to actually read the pages I linked to. WP:OWN clearly establishes that you don't own the article, WP:NOT clearly establishes that Wikipedia articles are to be neutral and informative, but not guides or advice on various topics. These are not negotiable and they are not controversial stances, these are core parts of the project. I don't know what else to say, you're ignoring my point. --W.marsh 20:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a Wikipedia administrator, there are roughly 1,000 of us (Wikipedia is one of the 15 largest sites on the internet), but my official capacity is not really important here. I am talking to you as a fellow editor. The article as you wrote it gives advice, which is not neutral. It simply does not have the encyclopedic tone you see in other articles. It has much more the tone of a magazine article or pamphlet than an encyclopedia article. Also, it is not formatted at all (no sections, no links to other articles, etc). I encourage you to look at other articles, and the guidelines I have mentioned as well as Wikipedia:How to edit a page, and work on improving the article, instead of just getting angry at me. I'm just telling you the mainline views here. It doesn't matter if you're the biggest expert in the world on some subject, you still need to format articles and write them in a proper tone. --W.marsh 23:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)