Talk:Ariel Fernandez

Promotional sections initiated by sock of indefinitely blocked Arifer; see this.

Neutrality in BLP Per ORCID record, Fernandez authored over 400 papers. Scopus cites over 300 since 1993. BLPs require neutrality and this one focuses on 3 papers challenged by some reader(s). Probably a senior editor needs to fix the BLP.RutiWinkler (talk) 14:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC) OK, senior editor here. Can you tell us what needs fixing as having had a look, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong! -Roxy the dog. wooF 16:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC) Thanks for your attention. The article dwells excessively on negative content. I tried to fix it a bit today. Most of the references in the BLP refer to 3 or 4 papers challenged. Those papers have not been retracted, so nothing serious seems to be wrong with them. Most of the career section referred to that issue. I now added a brief paragraph to put things in perspective: Fernandez has authored and published over 400 papers. Having three or four papers challenged is almost a drop in the bucket. No need to dwell on the matter, especially since the papers have not been retracted after ten years or more. RutiWinkler (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC) Apparently I am being accused of being a puppet of the subject of this BLP? [[1]]. Is this a way to deflect criticism? RutiWinkler (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC) If that's what he's mostly known for, based on WP:SECONDARY sources, then that's how our article must be, per multiple policies and guidelines. Concepts like "equal time" or "point/counterpoint" balance are forbidden. DMacks (talk) 20:36, 29 December 2021 (UTC) I am looking further into this BLP. The BLP quotes five posts from a blog that deprecates Fernandez but a published quote by a Nobel laureate on one of his books got taken out. The page needs to be balanced. RutiWinkler (talk) 15:31, 31 December 2021 (UTC) Input needed I have an idea. This page seems very conflictive and editing it is very complicated. A blog deprecating Fernandez is quoted five times and a Nobel laureate commenting on his book is left out. I suggest contacting AF directly, so we can get his input on the talk page and get consensus on what to include, leave out, change, etc. RutiWinkler (talk) 00:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC) @RutiWinkler: If we're trying to build an encyclopedia with neutral point of view, contacting the subject is one of the worst approaches possible, because they're going to push for the best possible light. —C.Fred (talk) 00:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC) I recall reading that the subject input is important to build a BLP, and we can always veto or reject anything promotional. As it stands, this BLP seems to berate the subject and I am being censored. RutiWinkler (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC) Extended content bottom Vandalism This BLP has been vandalized for years by people like JoJo Anthrax who keep using Wikipedia and other sites to defame and deprecate Ariel Fernandez. I was just following an active discussion of neutrality on this page. It got suddenly taken out as being promotional. This BLP contains five quotes of a blog that keeps berating the subject. On the other hand, a recent mention of Fernandez's published record was branded promotional? The authoritative intervention of a senior editor is needed to fix this page. 181.228.122.52 (talk) 14:17, 3 January 2022 (UTC)