This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mike Searson (talk | contribs) at 01:21, 22 November 2006 (read understood). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome, Mike Searson, to Misplaced Pages!

Enjoy editing here on Misplaced Pages and I hope you will stay! Be sure to post your name on the Misplaced Pages new user log. Below are some useful tutorials and places of interest:

• Editing tutorial — learn how to edit articles
• Five pillars of Misplaced Pages — learn about Misplaced Pages's basic guidelines and policies
• How to write a great article— learn how to creat feature article-status articles
• Picture tutorial — learn how to upload pictures
• Manual of Style — learn how articles should be written
• Sandbox — practice writing articles
• RC Patrol — help to prevent vandalism
• Wikiprojects — join a group that suits your interest

You can sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes: ~~~~; this adds your name and current time to your comments. If you need any more help, come to Bootcamp, add {{helpme}} to your talk page, or contact me on my talk page. Have fun!

--TBCTaLk?!? 22:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Emerson Pages

Mike- thanks for contributing to the Ernest Emerson pages and making corrections/adding additional info. I am a fan of his stuff. It seems like some people think there should be more sources and references, and I am having a hard time finding them from "legitimate" sources. Most are in advertisements, but I have put links to most of the articles I have found (online).I konw there is a lot of hype associated with them, so it is seen as difficult to divide facts from hype. If you could help with the endeavor I would appreciate it. I also see that you are a veteran. Thank you for your service to The USA. God Bless America. Isaac Crumm 08:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Isaac,

I'm a longtime Emerson collector and friend of Mr Emerson. I have 20+ years of articles from magazines, trade shows, industry publications, books, and catalogs. There are alot of facts out there, just a matter of detailing them. --Mike Searson 03:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Mike, super work on those Emerson pages. I just hope they are NPOV enough for some of the wikinazis around here. I used to be involved with it much more, but you may be interested in usualsuspect dot net. They kind of started out as an Emerson fan club, but last I saw (a few years) they were into all kinds of tactical equipment. I don't have a login there anymore, but I remember them as a bunch of neat guys. Isaac Crumm 03:55, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mike,

I am trying to help build the Strider article with verifiable source material. If you want to talk to me about editing the Strider article and other knife articles for the good of the encylopedia please use my talk page. If you want to talk about what you think you know about my reputation, use the same page.

If you look through the History of the Strider article, you'll see that I was the one who removed the USN-styled character assasination of Mick Strider because I thought it was irrelevant and cruel.

I don't know what you're reading about me or why you are attacking me here. I think you have some bad information and I can clear it up for you if you need me to. Still, I had to post the defamation and no personal attacks notices because I've been attacked by crazed Strider fans before. I think you can understand.

Thanks, Sam 16:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Sam,

How was this not a personal attack?

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Jerry.mills&oldid=77279071

That was what I was referring to, yet you deny it.

--Mike Searson 03:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Mike!!! Your contribution to the Ernest Emerson article was much appreciated! --Xephael 21:57, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mike,

After re-reading your comments @ Stider Knives Talk Page, and meditating on the subject, I have to agree that my comments do not have anything to add to the Strider Knives page. I agree with you that even if it is on the talk page, it truly does not contribute to the article. I might have been under the wrong impression about what wikipedia was all about.

When and if I have anything worthy of the page, I will add and expect assistance from more knowledgeable people.

Thanks for keeping an eye out,

user:jerry.mills

Dear Mike,

Using your talk page to keep this off the discussion pages. You can use mine if you want to keep this off your page.

Do you realize how much the Emerson and Strider articles resemble fan sites? I don't mean to dismiss your hard work, Mike, but these are awful.

What I'm getting at is that these articles don't really need to tell us that Ernie Emerson was born in a 20X20 log cabin, do they? He's an important knife maker, but it's not like he is George Washington. Further, he can get a 3000-word puff piece done on him in any or all three of the glossy knife magazines with one phone call. Does that kind of fluff need to be in an encyclopedic article?

The same goes for the Strider article, and all the model listings being loaded into each article. These look worse than fansites; they look like brochures. I want to show you the links to wikipedia style and "what wikipedia is not," but I don't want to come off like I'm browbeating you. When you have time can you look at that and tell me what you think? Doesn't need to be done right away, either. You can use my talk page if you like. Thanks, Sam 18:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Sam,

I started working on what was there. I don't see how either can be considered a "Fan page" or a "brochure" every fact can be documented and is documented. The Ernest Emerson page is a biography about Mr Emerson. You may not think it's noteworthy that the man was born in humble surroundings and rose to the top of his field...some people do.

All of the models are not loaded into each article. There are many on the Emerson Knives article, again put their by previous editors. You ever wonder how many people ask you how many models, variations, etc that exist or why a knife was made a certain way? As a longtime collector I am asked these all the time and I see it on the various knife forums over and over. The only models I made mention of were the ones with the NSN numbers or those with some historical significance.

I did plan on some major revisions to both over the holidays as I may get a break from my full-time job for a few days.

Sorry you think my work is awful...perhaps you can show me some of what you have done so I am not such a miserable writer. I still want to see some of your contributions, especially in the knife community...I understand you're a maker and a dealer and a writer. --Mike Searson 02:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Understood, that you only added to what was already there. I didn't say that what you wrote was awful, or bad writing; just that the articles look awful. Nor was I trying to one-up you. I never mock people who are making a real effort to write well.

You can overreact to my advice if you like, that's always an option. My only concern is that these look like fan sites and not like encyclopedic entries. The reason for my concern is that, eventually, Misplaced Pages administrators will delete them for that very reason. You're kind of new here, so you won't know about that unless you see it happen or read it in the guidelines. If you aren't going to read the guidelines to make them Wiki compliant, you could look at some of the gun pages for a guide. I don't know enough about Strider and Emerson to add anything encyclopedic. But, I am trying to help you. If you don't want the advice, you don't have to take it. But when they delete those articles, you'll know why.

Your comment that the Ernest Emerson page is a biography is not well met. You need to read the Wiki Manual of Style to understand what makes a biography and what makes a fan page. I understand that you didn't start any of these pages, but you are doing the most to add sycophantic puffery to them -- intentionally or not.

I can tell that you are emotionally invested in these knife maker articles, and I understand that it will be difficult to reason with you. That's why I approached you about these problems privately on our talk pages before I fixed them myself. This is how things are done, here. This isn't the usual suspects forum site. If you're going to act like you're in there, then there is no point in including you in discussions on how to make these articles presentable to the rest of the world. Nevertheless, I wanted to try.

Finally, I think it's strange that you should suggest that I don't appreciate someone pulling himself up by his bootstraps from humble beginnings. You are the one who first wrote to me telling me to go back to waiting tables. What it undignified or dishonorable about working for a living, I'll never know. I knew to expect that kind of comment from someone like Rick H., whose bills are all taken care of by his wife and the county.

I didn't know to expect it from you. You're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Use my talk page to let me know which you are let's move forward. Sam 17:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)