User talk:Mishmish22
Sock puppet warning[edit]
Per WP:SOCK, creating a new user account in order to evade a block is a violation of our rules. I'm not going to report this account, for the moment, as a possible sock puppet, because the issue is still relatively minor. Instead, I am going to repeat the rules:
(1) You cannot add information to an article unless is comes from a reliable source, such as a newspaper or magazine.
(2) If you add controversial/contentious information to an article about a living person (such as Pablo Ganguli), you must cite a source. The Pablo Ganguli article has plenty of sources already, so you should have no problem figuring out the format for citing a source. If you're not sure, just do your best; someone else can fix any errors.
(3) When you do add information from a reliable source, and you do cite the source, you must also phrase the information in a neutral way. Generally this is easy to do - just paraphrase the information from the source you are using.
If you don't do (1), (2), and (3), and you repeatedly ignore warnings that you are continuing to violate Wikipedia rules, then you will be blocked. If you do follow (1), (2), and (3), then you won't be blocked.
You can read more about editing articles about living people at this policy page. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
BLP warning[edit]
Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Adding FACTS to Wikipedia articles[edit]
I'm not personally interested in protecting Ganguli, nor do I care whether the information in the article is positive or negative about him. What I do care about is whether information in the article is allowable per our policy on information about living people. I am, like all the other editors here, required to follow that policy.
Here's the problem - regardless of what you personally know about why Ganguli left Morocco, that information cannot be put into a Wikipedia article unless you also provide a source. If what you want to add is something from the "public record", then you should have no difficulty being able to cite a source for the text you add.
So again I repeat: you can put anything in Wikipedia - negative, positive, whatever - into an article as long as (a) you cite a source; (b) that source meets our criteria for reliability (that means, among other things, that a blog or personal website or discussion forum isn't acceptable as a source, generally); and (c) the wording added to the article is neutral (see WP:NPOV) and in fact is supported by (based on) the source that is cited.
If you do (a), (b), and (c), then I'll do my best to make sure that the added information stays in the article. If you can't do all three, then you need to stop trying to add text to the article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- To respond more specifically to you: you can take this discussion to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard, if you want to ask other editors what they think. If you have a question as to whether a particular document or web page is a reliable source, you can ask at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources.
- As for whether the majority of the 27 sources cited in footnotes are "puff pieces written by himself or hack pals of his", you should post, at Talk:Pablo Ganguli, which ones should be removed as not being reliable sources. But, more importantly, you need to understand that it's perfectly acceptable to use an interview ("puff piece") as the basis for what is in Wikipedia, if that use is limited: for example, here's one sentence that is absolutely acceptable: In August 2008, Ganguli said that the festival planned for Moscow in October 2008 probably would have to be postponed.[27]. That's a neutral fact, not puffery, and, quite frankly, Wikipedia doesn't care if the cited source itself is neutral or not, as long the information in the Wikipedia article is (a) supported and (b) neutral in language. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
