User talk:MusicEditor1234: Difference between revisions
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Thanks |
Thanks |
||
Hello, I'm not John. But I have noticed your sudden wealth of objections to this article, which was created by several authors (which I am one) over several years, and has never received a complaint before to my knowledge. Today out of the blue you demand 20-30 extra citations, with the threat of it's removal. I'll be honest this |
Hello, I'm not John. But I have noticed your sudden wealth of objections to this article, which was created by several authors (which I am one) over several years, and has never received a complaint before to my knowledge. Today out of the blue you demand 20-30 extra citations, with the threat of it's removal. I'll be honest this is confusing on your part. |
||
Or, can you explain why you chose to make so many demands to an article this suddenly, when your user history suggests it's not something you've done before? |
Or, can you explain why you chose to make so many demands to an article this suddenly, when your user history suggests it's not something you've done before? it seems like a personal grudge of some kind? |
||
To state again, the article was put together by several, neutral authors, and I think it has a good degree of journalistic neutrality when rereading it. Others can disagree, but trying to have it removed in spite is not in the spirit of |
To state again, the article was put together by several, neutral authors, and I think it has a good degree of journalistic neutrality when rereading it. Others can disagree, but trying to have it removed in spite is not in the spirit of information. If there's something you think should be in it, and have sources or something, then have at it! |
||
I had a number of sources, in hand at the time, mostly newspaper articles, for some of the information. But these I couldn't find links to online. I suppose they could be linked with more research, but I don't get the feeling that is what you would want to see happen, so much as just to cause annoyance. |
|||
But regarding your flagging it for removal this way, it does not have COI issues to any degree that I can see. It does not promote a company or organization, direct to other websites, and relies on information available to the public in news articles and websites. I just don't understand why you object so much, can you explain? |
|||
In the meantime, could you please stop trying to have the article removed? A graduate student in Hamburg recently used the article for her masters thesis after contacting me. And other uses like that make me hope that this information is available to others. |
|||
If you have sourced objections to add or something, then I think that's what Wikipedia is about, and have at it. Just trying to have something removed the way you have today is a bit weird. |
|||
Thanks |
Thanks |
||
Revision as of 02:01, 17 August 2017
Conflict of Interest
Hello John, I would suggest you read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Thanks
Hello, I'm not John. But I have noticed your sudden wealth of objections to this article, which was created by several authors (which I am one) over several years, and has never received a complaint before to my knowledge. Today out of the blue you demand 20-30 extra citations, with the threat of it's removal. I'll be honest this is confusing on your part.
Or, can you explain why you chose to make so many demands to an article this suddenly, when your user history suggests it's not something you've done before? it seems like a personal grudge of some kind?
To state again, the article was put together by several, neutral authors, and I think it has a good degree of journalistic neutrality when rereading it. Others can disagree, but trying to have it removed in spite is not in the spirit of information. If there's something you think should be in it, and have sources or something, then have at it!
I had a number of sources, in hand at the time, mostly newspaper articles, for some of the information. But these I couldn't find links to online. I suppose they could be linked with more research, but I don't get the feeling that is what you would want to see happen, so much as just to cause annoyance.
In the meantime, could you please stop trying to have the article removed? A graduate student in Hamburg recently used the article for her masters thesis after contacting me. And other uses like that make me hope that this information is available to others.
Thanks
Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or 
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.