Talk:Alan Cinis

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Corrections to this bio page.

edit

I would like assistance in preventing any rollbacks to the details on this page which I have just corrected and updated. The change logs shows rollbacks have occurred since last I did this.

Articles used to source the "Controversy" section were incorrectly reported by the media. The drug charges listed in these articles were published prior to court appearances and since sentancing there has been no update as the media didn't publish the results of the case.

The information is misleading, personally harmful and professionally damaging. Police records, if they exist are private material and it's inappropriate to display them.

Also information listed in the "Politics" section has been updated as again, media quoted were incorrect in regards to campaigning (which didn't happen) and the apparent campaign content.

Ref: Removing unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material; note that the policy says: "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence


Hmsea (talk) 03:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

"Poorly sourced" refers to content that is not supported by the sources used, or that is sourced from sites that don't meet the requirements expected of reliable sources. The content that you removed comes from The Daily Telegraph, Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian and the Melbourne Herald Sun, all of which are considered to be reliable sources. Even the Balmain Village Voice, a News Limited affiliate, falls into this category. The sources all seem to support each other's stories so the content is not poorly sourced, and certainly not "badly sourced".[1] As a city councillor and actor in a popular TV series, the story of his drug involvement is in the public interest, so there is an argument that this should be in the article. --AussieLegend () 13:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Controversy section

edit

Several hours ago I had a peculiar request from a new editor on my talk page to stop rollbacks at this article.[2] A review of the article's edit history shows there have been several attempts by SPAs to remove content sourced to The Daily Telegraph, Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian and the Melbourne Herald Sun, all of which are considered to be reliable sources. The removals appear to have been made at the request of the subject,[3] who has also made edits to this article.[4] There is evidence of sockpuppetry, mentioned when it was last protected.[5] The editor who removed the content today, despite being a newly registered editor, stated in his second sentence here, "The change logs shows rollbacks have occurred since last I did this",[6] implying that he is one of the previous SPAs. I've restored the deleted content, and this section is provided to acquaint new editor with the article's history. --AussieLegend () 14:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alan Cinis. 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}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)Reply