Talk:Mlađan Dinkić

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	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
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Serbia: Belgrade Mid‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Belgrade task force (marked as mid-importance).

Dinkic plays a guitar ?

Is it true that Dinkic plays a guitar? I have heard that he plays rock :-). Adrian (talk) 20:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B92 About Dinkic

Hello, I have reverted these edits because I doubt that this data, represented in this form is really for an encyclopedia. It looks like some sort of propaganda, research that was done by some company (the article says it too). If you really insist inserting this data, maybe we can paraphrase it, in a neutral and non-propagandist sense. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, Dinkic admitted himself that he lied [1]. Doesn't seem like propaganda to me. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

more accurate wording would be: Mrkonjic and Dinkic record-holders for 'false promises'. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, I am not saying otherwise, this info is unquestionably OK, but I think it should be written in some sort neutral way, since this is the research and analysis of one single company in Serbia. By Wikipedia standards it can be considered as OR because it is only analyzing and not stating the data about this. Maybe we could write this in a more neutral way, something like " In December 2010 a research by "company name" stated that Dinkic lied to people that and that. " Adrian (talk) 15:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since he already responded to these statements about him (on B92 site) I will try now to insert one possible version of this data all together. Please say what you think. Adrian (talk) 16:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sure, insert whatever you think is appropriate. in regards to WP:OR, that policy refers to wikipedia editors publishing their own research. it does not refer to independent papers reporting of original research of other entities. b92 is a secondary source in this case. if it was doing a research, it would be primary source (and doing OR, but still not users OR). cheers. 188.2.50.125 (talk) 20:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should be more specific, WP:SYN which makes a part of the wikipedia OR policy. I am not sure if the second sentence that I added is formed very well according to this. What do you think? Do you have some idea or as I inserted it now in the article is OK? Cheers. Adrian (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

therefore, he should be respected sounds weird. else seem fine. 188.2.50.125 (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe like this? Adrian (talk) 06:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it like this. A bit too long, but wording is fine. I would leave it until new editors come up with new suggestions. Thanks for corrections. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 08:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Np. Greetings. Happy holidays ! Adrian (talk) 10:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]