CollinsGen12
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
CollinsGen12, you are invited to the Teahouse
edit
|
Hi CollinsGen12! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Please join other people who edit Wikipedia at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Wikipedia where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. We hope to see you there! This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot (talk) 04:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC) |
Guinea
editHi, thank you for your contributions and comments on the Mohammed Condé article. It’s always better to have another pair of eyes to ensure an article is accurate. I would like to discuss your claim that these Guinean news websites are “the personal outlets of political opponents, not news organizations”, as this claim is not supported in any sources I can find. Most Guinean news channels may be politically connected somehow, but so are most newspapers in the world. This has not stopped these Guinean news outlets providing normal and unbiased news on a wide range of other issues – one cannot discount an entire newspaper on the unverified allegation that it is personally run by political opponents. I concede to the fact that my contributions need to be more objective and ‘neutral point of view’ and welcome your help as I strive to ensure this is the case in the future. I look forward to discussing these with you on the respective Talk pages. Thanks OscarK878 (talk) 14:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the invite to discuss your contributions. Most of sources are not newspapers (please check and revert back with proof). No care is taken to verify any information. That's fine in so far as general information about the country but when individuals are concerned the BLP standards ought to be followed. just because something is online does not make it a newspaper. I've read all the sources in french, they are blogs and that is reflected in both tone and balance of their articles. Also, in some cases the allegations contained in the articles have been debunked or provably false. I have no interest in removing normal and unbiased news and have tried to help clean up most of your other articles as they all have in common the reprisal of the same unsubstantiated statements. CollinsGen12 (talk) 15:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, I looked into the official news channels in Guinea on this website - [1] - and it seems that you are right about some of the sources I have used. I assumed that, due to the official branding on the webpages, they looked like legitimate news channels. Guineelive.com was also not on the official list, however it looks legitimate and even has contact numbers and email addresses, unlike most blogs. None of these websites have styled themselves as blogs either, keeping to a informational structure that is much more akin to media websites. The only outlet that looks like a blog to me is Guineeweb.org, however this was not an important source and that particular information could be found elsewhere. My other sources are all from Aminata.com , GuineeConakry.info, and GuineeNews.org, all of which are on the official list of media outlets in Guinea OscarK878 (talk) 16:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)