Talk:Peter Romary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography  
WikiProject icon 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

POV Check[edit]

POV-check for BLP requested 16 September 2013: Sources 1,22,25 appear to fail WP:BLPSPS; Overall tone is resume-like; Coffeelover1979 (talk) 02:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Sources 1 and 25 are clearly not a violation of WP:BLPSPS, per WP:SELFPUB. I see no evidence that source 22 is self-published, so it doesn't seem to fall under WP:BLPSPS at all. Dfarrell07 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
  • See my note below - an employee's bio on a company website should not be used to support a claim to be an "acknowledged expert". This is not the purpose of WP:SELFPUB

Rmchater (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Further to above, much of text is unsupported by sources.

Author appears to have personal knowledge of subject, so have tagged for COI Coffeelover1979 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Regarding the support of the text by sources, I suggest noting specific problems in-line. Overall, there is a 1.2:1 ratio of citations to sentences, which while only an approximation of support of claims by sources, is considerably better than average. Considering the claims and citation support in more detail, no claims stand out to me as unsubstantiated. Also, please elaborate on which authors seem to have personal knowledge of which subjects. Overall, I see no support for WP:COI tag. Dfarrell07 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


  • I agree that a number of assertions in Career are unsupported and imply a knowledge of the subject. hence WP:COI. None of the following statements is supported by sources and would all benefit from inline correction:

"The amount of damages was reduced by the trial judge, after the verdict was returned...."

"These included receiving the inaugural..."

"Romary has also received a number of honors from states including being awarded ..."

"When Romary began working in academe he founded, in 2006, the Annual..."

"Romary lives in Greenville, North Carolina with his wife Marcy and daughter Elizabeth." is not referenced even by either of the subject's company websites

One statement in particular is supported only by self-published sources and may qualify for the WP:peacock tag:

"Romary is an acknowledged expert in the fields of..."

  • Feel free to delete the offending lines ... DreddHK 21:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreddhk (talk

contribs)

Section Break[edit]

  • I will check links and stuff over the next day or so to updated links - thanks for the heads up DreddHK 22:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Have removed claim that "QVerity" is "founded and staffed by former Central Intelligence Agency personnel". The company's own home page claims that only 4 of the 7 partners are former CIA members.

Rmchater (talk) 08:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

  • COI tag removed following DreddHK's revisions Rmchater (talk) 09:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  • The more I dig with this character, the less the claims add up. In the source for his pro-bono work, behind a paywall, the subject has worked for 7 years, at 100 cases each year, with a total of 700 pro-bono cases. In the text, the author, without citing another source, has extrapolated this to 12 years and 1200 clients in total. I am continuing to Google, and may have some more information to add. Rmchater (talk) 07:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • This user in particular - Johnlinley - would appear to qualify as WP:SPA used only for this subject and ancillary pages. Coffeelover1979 (talk) 22:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Sam.Eagle.2012is very "helpful" providing links for this one page. I think that's the WP:SPA - probably the subject of what looks very like a self-penned page. @Cofeelover1979 - how strange we should find the Edwards' campaign story at the same time. You beat me to posting it. Rmchater (talk) 23:50, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


  • I have doubts about this claim: "Romary's legal work most notably included obtaining a then-world record..." as, although it is allegedly US news, the supporting sources are an unbylined interview with a local British paper and a Press Release from the subject's University when he returned to give a talk, the cost of which was defrayed by his family. I can't find a better source online, and think this should be removed. Rmchater (talk) 13:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


Notability of subject[edit]

Following on from the above, I am requesting a notability check. Once the self-published sources and employer press releases are removed, there is not much left in the way of sources. Rmchater (talk) 09:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


This article now seems not notable, very contentious, and changes may or may not be vindictive. Appears JohnLinley, Coffeelover1979, and Rmchater were created for one article each, (Romary, Tsai, Jacobs) and now have intersected here. Something smells fishy. Pages created, or contributed to, by all three accounts look resume like, one sided, biased, and created for single purpose. I think all articles should have same standards applied to them.

The information on masonry is not accurate. Something is out of place. I would suggest that, to clarify, the allegations be referred to the Grand Lodge of NC and Grand Lodge of USA. (The implications about "current" issue implicates all of their members, and therefore any members of lodges in that state and those who affiliate and recognize them around the world. Those were made on main page and especially here). Those are serious allegations about alleged "current status" that, if false, impact and cause harm to lots of people around the world. With the cross over, intersect (on this one page), removal and changing of material, contention, and the sole subject accounts, this matter should be fully reviewed, settled and any violating accounts, and articles, should be blocked and removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarionWormer (talkcontribs) 17:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Another new user - MarionWormer - has been created today to add to this page. I have already requested both a neutrality and a notability review, as this page seems to have become resume-like, and many of the claims do not stand up to examination. All pages should be edited to improve sources and neutrality.

When creating BLP pages I learned a lot about the bans on self-published sources and the need for NPOV. That was absent here. Since the promotional language was removed, a number of new logins have appeared to challenge the changes to this page. Coffeelover1979 had attempted to create a page for Chris Tsai (an art collector), but this was protected from creation, and I became aware of this debate when I created a page for Tsai Capital. I considered the Tsai BLP page insufficiently notable for inclusion. Coffeelover1979 suspected this page to be a promotional page by a single-purpose user and asked my opinion. In my opinion this had become a promotional page, and although now more balanced, the subject is insufficiently notable for Wikipedia. If MarionWormer has specific information on a change in masonic policy, then it should be posted. If the segregation policy is no longer in place, there should be a source available to confirm this. Rmchater (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Dude, chill!!!! I was AGREEING and saying page should be deleted, not notable. Calm down and re-read. The stuff on masons that was posted is way out of line, out of date, and is bogus, calling people racist hurts. Not wasting any more time here with the paranoids, enjoy your continued stay! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarionWormer (talkcontribs) 20:23, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
The information on masons seem well-sourced to me. It is a senior NC judge who has used the term racist. To call this "way out of line, out of date, and .. bogus" requires citation. All edits should be assumed to be in good faith, and this appears so to me.

Rmchater (talk) 21:45, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I am coming on here to make one point about masonry in the USA as this article is now being disseminated among brothers: Masonic lodges in NC do not have any "color bar". They are not racist. For years and years they have accepted members of all colors, creeds, religions, and nationalities. Prince Hall Masons have done exactly the same. To say otherwise is false.
Further, both Prince Hall and AF&AM, in North Carolina, have recognized each other for a number of years now. NC Masons recognize, are recognized, and connect with brothers around the globe.
Here are just two of many articles that you will find online to correct you. Found right beneath the out of date article you posted from your "search" when you accused people of being racists. A search should also show how the lodge you accuse of being "separatist" had voted on the recognition issue throughout the years. You will find many lodges had very diverse membership for many, many years.
http://chooseprincehall.com/centrallodge1/ph_recognition.html
http://www.marcusorr.com/dwell-together-in-unity


Altered masonic mentions[edit]

Thanks for the sources. I've modified the paragraph about freemasonry and racial segregation within the text to clarify the dates relevant to this article. Coffeelover1979 (talk) 12:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peter Romary. 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)