| 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 article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editI find the multiple edits made by 149.18.42.68 on 1 December 2015 quite interesting. They all appear to add editorial/opinion content. It might be good if someone could scrutinize them. 213.202.124.181 (talk) 10:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out. I wrote the original, I think I wrote it in a fair way, and agree that the edits add an editorial slant that favors the subject of the article. But I don't want this to become my personal crusade. It would be nice if someone else would pick that up. Pgramsey (talk) 23:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes this article seems to be the focus of a reputation management effort. Metalliqaz (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Looks like it happened again...
editSee: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20181003/23545140776/thomas-goolnik-gets-google-to-forget-our-story-about-him-getting-google-to-forget-stories-about-thomas-goolnik.shtml 24.20.239.63 (talk) 16:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)