Talk:Alexander Halavais: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:40, 25 October 2009

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn.

I do not dispute that I "may" have a confict of interest. I am named in the blog and I dispute it! I have requested that the entry be deleted and have been denied, and I have been prevented from posting to the blog. The fact that I cannot dispute the posting is admitted by Halavais in the blog. The rules on linkin to the blogs of living people are unambiguous when it contains information about "third" parties, Wikipedia becomes complicit if it allows the blog to be linked. Considering that Halavais is a self-admitted "vandal" of Wikipedia I think this violation of the rules should be investigated.Wreid (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where are these "umambiguous" rules about linking to blogs of living people that contain informatio about "third parties", and how it makes Wikipedia "complicit" of something? Are you suggesting that if Wikipedia links to a blog that contains controversial material, WP is suddenly complicit within that controversy? I think you're quite off base. 64.7.166.10 (talk) 14:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:23, 24 October 2009 edit Wreid (talk \| contribs) 316 edits No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:40, 25 October 2009 edit undo 64.7.166.10 (talk) No edit summary Next edit →
Line 8:		Line 8:

	I do not dispute that I '''"may"''' have a confict of interest. I am named in the blog and I dispute it! I have requested that the entry be deleted and have been denied, and I have been prevented from posting to the blog. The fact that I cannot dispute the posting is admitted by Halavais in the blog. The rules on linkin to the blogs of living people are unambiguous when it contains information about "third" parties, Wikipedia becomes complicit if it allows the blog to be linked. Considering that Halavais is a self-admitted "vandal" of Wikipedia I think this violation of the rules should be investigated.[[User:Wreid\|Wreid]] ([[User talk:Wreid\|talk]]) 23:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)		I do not dispute that I '''"may"''' have a confict of interest. I am named in the blog and I dispute it! I have requested that the entry be deleted and have been denied, and I have been prevented from posting to the blog. The fact that I cannot dispute the posting is admitted by Halavais in the blog. The rules on linkin to the blogs of living people are unambiguous when it contains information about "third" parties, Wikipedia becomes complicit if it allows the blog to be linked. Considering that Halavais is a self-admitted "vandal" of Wikipedia I think this violation of the rules should be investigated.[[User:Wreid\|Wreid]] ([[User talk:Wreid\|talk]]) 23:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
			:Where are these "umambiguous" rules about linking to blogs of living people that contain informatio about "third parties", and how it makes Wikipedia "complicit" of something? Are you suggesting that if Wikipedia links to a blog that contains controversial material, WP is suddenly complicit within that controversy? I think you're quite off base. [[Special:Contributions/64.7.166.10\|64.7.166.10]] ([[User talk:64.7.166.10\|talk]]) 14:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)