User talk:Maria Négete
Maria Négete, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure![edit]
|
Wells[edit]
Dear Maria Négete,
I'm Benedict Wells myself. First: thank you for being interested in my Wikipedia entry. But I hope that you respect the german Wikipedia entry with all of it's sources. For example: I officially changed my last name, it's no pseudonym or nom de plum. And I'm german-swiss. And for me it is very important to be independent and known for my work and not being famous for my relatives or my former last name. So I never used my old last name to sell books and become popular. My descendts were revealed against me will. And I really want to sever myself from my family's history. That's all very important for me.
I hope you respect my editings and understand me!
All the best, Benedict Wells — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- The English Wikipedia edition is entirely separate from the German one. It is also strongly advised against editing one's own biography. I already corrected the error regarding the new name being a legal name and not a pen name, but I don't think most of your other changes were acceptable. Firstly, some the material come across as what we call original research. Secondly, notable family relations are usually addressed first in a section titled "Family", "Background" or something like that, and not in the middle of the article. Thirdly, unfortunately, Wikipedia simply reports what other sources have already reported, and since your name change and family background have been widely reported, they need to be mentioned in the article in a normal encyclopedic context, and Wikipedia cannot assist in severing family ties. --Maria Négete (talk) 23:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
I understand definitely your point and I never wanted to write my own Wikipedia entry. To be honest: I think there should be no english entry at all since there are no english translations of my books yet. But when I realized that there were many errors I tried to correct. If you translate the sources you will see that I'm half swiss and that I want to sever myself from the history of my not so "noble" family. That fact is ultimatively important and the reason why I officially changed my last name. And in Germany there are only two or three articles about my roots because it is my privacy and the people respect the fact that I'm an independent person. I'm mostly known for being Benedict Wells the writer here (my roots were only revealed AFTER the success of my third novel and against my will), but in the english Wikipedia entry it seemed that I'm only known for being a part of this family and that's not true. I also never go to talkshows, I almost never give an interview, so I really fight for my privacy. Hope you anderstand that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think there is any doubt that you are notable by the standards of the English Wikipedia, regardless of whether your books have been published in English, both because of your books, your prizes and the reception of your books, including articles about you in numerous sources. The English Wikipedia is also written to give people who don't understand German the opportunity to learn about what is happening in German literature. By engaging in this literary activity you are seeking public attention in a way which makes it unrealistic to expect that you can control whether basic background information about you such as your birth name is made public. I find several articles in high-profile publications including Der Spiegel discussing the family background. Therefore, it is impossible for the English Wikipedia to omit this information, and it should be presented in a normal context, where one would normally find such information within the article in the English Wikipedia. --Maria Négete (talk) 00:23, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I totally agree that it is inevitable to mention my family background in a normal context. I just think it is important how it is done. Is my birth name mentioned three or four times or only one time? Is there written more about my family than my writing and the reasons why I have this entry or not? (In 99 % of the reviews and articles about my latest novel the words "von Schirach" were NOT mentioned for example). The next point is: if you - what I absolutely understand - mention my birth name and my roots and that I changed my last name, I think it is also very important to explain in one line WHY I did this step. It's not because of a private family fight (I actually have a very good relation to the living members of my family), to the contrary, it was always pointed out in the few print articles that revealed my roots. Because it describes who I am. I did change my name because of the history of my family in the last hundred years, escpecially because of the crimes my grandfather and other family members did during WW2. To not mention this fact for my decision to change my name but saying my family is "noble" feels totally wrong when you think about all the victims. So what I did was suggesting how the entry could be done. I mentioned my former name and roots myself, but I also pointed out the fact that I wanted to sever myself from my family's history. And that all of this was revealed against my will (which you can read in the SPIEGEL and other articles). Because it shows that I wasn't succesful because of my famous family background but by being just a normal independent writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 00:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- The article is currently very short, and could be expanded with more information about the literary work and its reception, which would make the family stuff seem less dominant. Also, it is possible to remove some material which isn't very relevant. For example, in general Wikipedia biographies only mention (particularly) notable relatives, and since Ariadne doesn't have a biography in the English Wikipedia, it seems unncessary to mention her in an article about her brother. The material about 18th century American ancestry could also be removed; it's already mentioned in the article on the family. I would propose a paragraph like this:
- He was born Benedict von Schirach, as a member of the Schirach family, and is a son of the sinologist Richard von Schirach, a cousin of the author Ferdinand von Schirach, and a grandson of the Nazi politician Baldur von Schirach. He changed his name to Benedict Wells some years before his literary debut [exact year would be better]. His family background did not become publicly known until after the success of his third novel, and he has since commented that this happened against his will, and that he changed his name to avoid being associated with his grandfather. He said the name Wells is a tribute to the character Homer Wells in John Irving's novel The Cider House Rules, and that Irving's books inspired him to become a writer.
- --Maria Négete (talk) 02:06, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding and your effort. I would still make this paragraph more common in the meaning of: There are a lot of "he says", so it seems like I just claim something, but these are all facts. Also the rest of the article is based on things I've said, but they are fact too. And I did not only want to avoid associated with my grandfather, above all I wanted to make clear that I convict what he did - and what other members of my family did around that time too. So this is why I have chosen the words: "To sever himself from the history of his family in any way possible". And if it follows right after my "convicted war criminal" grandfather, it's clear what is meant. The shorter the better in my eyes, actually I'm still very happy with the existing paragraph right now, though I know that this has nothing to say. And I changed my last name very early, but I have never said when exactly, same for my exact birth date. These are very private things, at least till somebody writes an article about it :-). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- "He says", "he commented" etc are standard, neutral phrases widely used in the English Wikipedia for the reason that we attribute that type of statements to particular sources, instead of publishing original thought. There is only one "he has since commented" and only one "he said", both of which refer to your reasoning and your inner thoughts instead of hard facts. For example, Richard v. Schirach being your father is a hard fact and it is sufficient to say that he is your father. However, the name Wells being a tribute to the character Homer Wells is not a hard fact and an example of your reasoning. The wording "he said" isn't intended to cast doubt on whether that is the case or your sincerity in that regard, but for Wikipedia's purposes, we cannot write about your inner thoughts from your direct perspective, we have to attribute such statements to a source with wordings like "Wells commented", "Wells said" etc. Wikipedia's manual of style recommends (WP:SAID) expressions such as "said, stated, described, wrote, commented, and according to" as the most neutral in most such cases (as opposed to more loaded terms such as "clarified, explained, exposed, found, pointed out, revealed, insisted, noted, observed, speculated, surmised, asserted, claimed, admitted, confessed, denied"). If you want a very particular wording to be used to explain the name change, it would help if there was a direct quote in a published source (such as Der Spiegel or a newspaper article) which could be quoted. --Maria Négete (talk) 16:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation, you're right, that makes sense. Unfortunately there is no direct quote. I never talk about my family in interviews, because it's my privacy and I don't want to sell books with that stuff. I was just saying those things once in a portrait to make my point clear and reveal my reasons. But not quotable. Nevertheless I allowed myself to suggest something based on your first suggestion:
- Wells' family background did not become publicly known until after the success of his third novel, and he has since commented that this happened against his will. He was born Benedict von Schirach, as a member of the sorbian Schirach family, and is a son of the sinologist Richard von Schirach, a cousin of the author Ferdinand von Schirach, and a grandson of the convicted national socialist politician Baldur von Schirach. To sever himself from the history of his family in any way possible and to be independent he officially changed his name to Benedict Wells as a young man. He said the name Wells is a tribute to the character Homer Wells in John Irving's novel The Cider House Rules, and that Irving's books inspired him to become a writer. He also has American and English ancestry and descends from two signatories of the United States Declaration of Independence, and from the politician Henry Middleton
Or:
- He was born Benedict von Schirach, as a member of the sorbian Schirach family, and is a son of the sinologist Richard von Schirach, a cousin of the author Ferdinand von Schirach, and a grandson of the convicted national socialist politician Baldur von Schirach. To sever himself from the history of his family in any way possible and to be independent he officially changed his name to Benedict Wells as a young man. His family background did not become publicly known until after the success of his third novel, and he has since commented that this happened against his will. He said the name Wells is a tribute to the character Homer Wells in John Irving's novel The Cider House Rules, and that Irving's books inspired him to become a writer. He also has American and English ancestry and descends from two signatories of the United States Declaration of Independence, and from the politician Henry Middleton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think the paragraph should start with the basic facts, as in the second proposal ("He was born Benedict von Schirach..."), which is the normal order for such a paragraph in Wikipedia. The problem with "To sever himself from the history of his family in any way possible" is that it is about his reasoning and inner thoughts, without being attributed to a source (also, "in any way possible" seems rather superfluous when we have already said "sever", which is also a very harsh word which gives the impression that he has broken with his family also on a more personal level). The sentence also sounds somewhat odd in English. For example "to be independent" can mean lots of things in English. The most relevant source, the Spiegel article, says he changed his name, that it became known against his will, that "Er wollte es allein schaffen" (that he wanted to be judged based on his own merits) and mentions the "falsche Vorstellungen" about a privileged background that people had due to his name.
- I also think the name change should, for ease of reading and for chronological reasons (for Wikipedia's purposes, his reasoning became known publicly much later), simply be stated as a fact first, with the reasoning described in the next sentence in the context of how this information became public.
- Regarding the description of Baldur von Schirach, since this article isn't about him or anyone who even knew him in life, I think it is sufficient to describe him briefly as a national socialist politician without elaborating on his misdeeds or his postwar fate. In any event, he is far more widely known as the leader of HJ than anything else, and if he were to be described in a more detailed way, it would be more natural to describe him as "the former leader of the Hitler Youth" or "the Nazi youth leader". Thus I would, based inter alia on the interview in Der Spiegel, propose the following wording:
- He was born Benedict von Schirach, as a member of the Sorbian Schirach family, and is a son of the sinologist Richard von Schirach, a cousin of the author Ferdinand von Schirach, and a grandson of the national socialist politician Baldur von Schirach. He changed his name to Benedict Wells some years before his literary debut. His family background did not become publicly known until after the success of his third novel, and he has since commented that this happened against his will, and that he changed his name to distance himself from his family's history and to be judged based on his own merits. He said the name Wells is a tribute to the character Homer Wells in John Irving's novel The Cider House Rules, and that Irving's books inspired him to become a writer.
- If you think "He also has American and English ancestry and descends from two signatories of the United States Declaration of Independence, and from the politician Henry Middleton" should also be included, I have no objection to that, but since you objected to the length of the paragraph and the inclusion of the family's nobility (which I consider more relevant), I thought it was unnecessary to include distant ancestors like those, since they are mentioned in the family article. --Maria Négete (talk) 22:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
One more time thanks for your answer. The wording you have suggested is great and correct. I also think "National socialist politician" is a good and sufficient solution, because one click and then you know everything anyway. As for my American and English ancestry: true, it is even more family, on the other side I think it is especially for the English/American Wikipedia side relevant. I would let it included in the article if that is possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Libuda84 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 12[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carl von Schirach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chamberlain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Eran Elhaik for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eran Elhaik is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eran Elhaik until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sgerbic (talk) 04:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)