Jump to content

Talk:En Foco

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) at 00:55, 14 February 2024 (Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Conflict of interest

[edit]

This article was created by User:Enfoco (contributions) and expanded by User:Romais (contributions). The article describes Miriam Romais as coeditor of En Foco's magazine and the organization's Executive Director. -- Hoary (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hoary - it is true, it seemed silly to pretend otherwise (now, THAT would be a conflict of interest!). I also received a message from GB that suggested other folks from outside the organization can add & edit, so its no longer a conflict. As far as notability goes, there are over 30 years of articles, essays and publications for and about the organization. Some of the country's leading writers have contributed to its magazine, and curated its shows. I assume that would be acceptable & no longer a conflict of interest? (Romais (talk) 12:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Spoken well.
It's not the fault of En Foco that I, halfway around the Earth, know little of it. What little I know is impressive. En Foco definitely deserves an article. Now let's work to describe it as straightforwardly (even flatly) as possible. Its qualities should still be apparent.
More later; I'm already almost asleep (no fault of yours). -- Hoary (talk) 16:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I may make a comment: a conflict of interest is not necessarily an impediment to creating and maintaining a great article. Even if the subject of an article, or an employee of the subject of an article wishes to contribute, the same guidelines apply as to notability, reliable sources, verifiability, etc. The problem really occurs when people with a conflict of interest start saying things like "I know this is true" and "I am a verifiable source", which don't work.  Frank  |  talk  16:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hee hee... understandable - we're always trying to fact check ourselves so I certainly understand the concept. I just tried entering a few more verifiable sources but it doesn't seem to be saving (Dos Mundos exhibition took place in 1973 at the New York Cultural Center in NYC). (Romais (talk) 20:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on En Foco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:53, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on En Foco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]