Talk:James Stunt
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the James Stunt redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
| 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. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Edit warring
edit@Khocon and Variation 25.2: Please discuss your differences here rather than edit warring. Coretheapple can help if they so choose. Semied to stop edit warring by IP's. --NeilN talk to me 18:43, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Promo, OR and false synthesis of sources
editDeleted texts which were not in the citation. These were totally original research or false explanation of the sources added to promote the subject.Most of the sources included just passing mentions about the subject. Also removed unencyclopedic info, such as his car license number etc. - Variation 25.2 (talk) 20:45, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Variation 25.2: Sir, i'm not agree with you. You were right about Car license number though.
But you can't just delete all the texts without any explanation. Let's check your edit revisions;
On the "Philanthropy" Section;
Stunt donated to many organisations and causes,[1] including the British Conservative Party,[2] The Prince's Trust,[3], Tusk Trust.[4]
Stunt helped pay for the renovations of a pavilion at his former college, Bradfield College; it renamed the pavilion Stunt Pavilion.[5]
"Why do you think those lines were promotional or Inappropriate for a Wiki page" ? Why did you deleted the texts sir? --Khocon (talk) 06:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
References
- ^ "'MEGA-RICH DONORS' WHO SPEND £50,000 TO DINE WITH THE PM". The Independent. Retrieved 22 September 2015.
- ^ "David Cameron's Tories in 'cash for access' backlash as donors pay £50,000 to have 'Dinner with Dave'". Daily Mirror.
- ^ "Our Patrons". The Prince's Trust. Retrieved 22 September 2015.
- ^ "Tusk Talk 2015 - Tusk Trust" (PDF). Tusk Trust. Retrieved 22 September 2015.
- ^ "STUNT PAVILION OPENING". Bradfield College Official.
Do not edit war
editHello guys, I have revised this article to the revision before your edit war started. Please discuss the references that have problems and then only remove that part. It is for the best of wikipedia if you rewrite promotional looking but referenced material than deleting it. Consider Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary and Wikipedia:Editing policy#Try to fix problems. --Skinssnapper (talk) 09:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- I think User:Skinssnapper is also a coi contributor as well as Khocon. The only major contribution of this user in in this article. Rests are just minor fix up in different pages. I have tagged the page with some issue template. DO NOT REMOVE these tags unless some experienced editor cleans up the artucle. The article is clearly a COI article. - 194.50.116.5 (talk) 10:04, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Education section has no reliable sources
editEducation section of this article is disputed, we should remove the unreliable info about a living person James Stunt. I'v found a mention about Bradfield college, so we can keep mention of Bradfield college.Khocon (talk) 06:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC) --
Tag related concerns
editHello,
Please do not tag the article unnecessarily instead correct the problems as I humbly requested before. I am going to ask a copy editor on wikipedia with no COI to correct the article. If smartse or any one else has a concern, please mention it here so that I can attempt to rewrite or remove issues caused by so many participant editors on this article. --Skinssnapper (talk) 06:29, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- With due respect to all participants in this article, I have requested copyedit [1]. I hope this will not be against any wikipedia policy. --Skinssnapper (talk) 06:39, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- From my research of wikipedia policies, I understand that edit warring is frowned upon. I will like to request that the users who are concerned about neutral tone of this article atleast tell me here what parts of the they are requiring a rewrite or removal of?--Skinssnapper (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- I have provided some copy edits, but more importantly, I have moved references around to match the text that the references support, checked the prose against the references, and performed basic verification that should be the basis of all Wikipedia articles. I'll provide some more copy-editing soon. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. Can you resolve the COI tag in your independent copy editing with required "clean up" and "neutral point of view"? I do not want this article to be in violation of wikipedia rules. --Skinssnapper (talk) 08:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Skinssnapper: The article should stay tagged until editors without any COI have had time to review it. There are obvious problems remaining as evidenced by my recent edits but a thorough review of sources is also necessary which will take some time. SmartSE (talk) 10:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I do not have any direct COI in most cases and I am only to make sure this article does not violate wikipedia rules and I support the replacement that is going on here. I do not know how many editors have tried to promote it over months to get in good books of the person and I do not know which ex participant is paid and which is not but I will try my best to assist you make it neutral as I do not think this article is supposed to be biased. I have invited @Jonesey95: from the Guild of Copy editors to help because he is not even a bit related to this. He is an editor without COI. He told me he is giving the article some time and I know he has done a good work already. The tag should be removed because main parts of the article have been replaced. I will not remove the tag myself yet but I am asking Jonesey95 and yourself to resolve this tag by replacing the text if you wish. --Skinssnapper (talk) 11:03, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- SmartSE or I will remove the tag when we are done. I have no COI on this article.
- SmartSE has removed a number of sections of unverifiable prose, including statements about Stunt allegedly being a billionaire. He does not appear in the 2015 list of over 1,740 billionaires compiled by Forbes, which is a reliable source. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:01, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- I have completed my copy edit of this article. It does not appear to have any COI problems at this point. I'll wait for SmartSE to remove the COI tag. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Requesting to remove COI tag
edit | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Jonesey95, from GOCE Wikipedia has edited the article from top to bottom and has left no COI in the article. Apart from Jonesey95's own statement above on this talkpage that there is no remaining COI on the article at this point, smartse has cut down the article. Newest version we have is a neutral and clean article. The blocked editor Skinssnapper's edits are no more present in this article. I am requesting that an uninvolved wikipedia editor should remove this tag now to as I do not want to edit war. I don't have COI to this subject. I had to use this template because I thought it's a good idea to ask help from uninvolved editors. ---Khocon (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Should have its own article
editStunt seems to be migrating from "famous for being Petra Ecclestone's husband" to "famous for being famous". See recent interview in Tatler, and stories in the Mail about him being extravagant. Interview in Tatler alludes to business activities, but it's never clear what they are. cagliost (talk) 16:34, 31 May 2018 (UTC)