Jump to content

Talk:Yvette d'Entremont

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

Seems pretty biased and promotional

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This article seems like it's a promotion advert for d'Entremont and seems to include a lot of non-notable details and peacock type stuff. SageRad (talk)

Which pieces do you find objectionable? Maggie mcgarvey (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

SourceWatch

[edit]

@McSly, Tryptofish, Kingofaces43, and 188.87.238.162:

Hello, everyone. This is an attempt to resolve the dispute regarding the SourceWatch external link that has been the subject of one addition, and multiple reversions.

Here are the facts:

  1. SourceWatch is run by the nonprofit, progressive watchdog and advocacy group, the Center for Media and Democracy.
  2. SourceWatch, as a wiki, is much like Wikipedia: the articles in question can be edited, though one needs a account, and must request one from administration, to be able to edit.
  3. As a matter of policy, WP:ELNO reminds us that: "Open wikis [should normally not serve as external links], except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors."
  4. The stability and number of editors of SourceWatch is unknown to this editor.

I would like to hear some opinions on this matter. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:09, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, everyone. Editor has been blocked for 24 hours. Sorry to bother y'all. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for starting the talk section, nevertheless. There is really no question that the link is inappropriate. I've already reverted the IP three times, and even though it's probably the kind of thing that is exempted from 3RR, I'd rather not do it a fourth time. Could someone else fix the page please? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mention it. I'll do it. I've only reverted once.Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) (signing again: — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:17, 9 June 2018 (UTC))[reply]
Turns out I haven't reverted anything on the article at all. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]