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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Agreed? Ajw522 ( talk) 08:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Larry Agran. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
This article has seen a significant number of edits in a short timespan that coincides with the declaration of Candidacy of the article's subject. Many of these edits provide good references but use words and phrases that are not from a neutral standpoint and seek cast the subject in a light that is not consistent with Wikipedia policy. Those sections referring the Irvine Great Park, in particular, seem to be intent on erasing the documented history of controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.234.230.103 ( talk) 16:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Okay, what should be changed in the OC Great Park section, specifically? Chshmartutyun ( talk) 22:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
For help with understanding maintenance templates please refer to WP:WTRMT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rearete ( talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
After reading the article the relevant policies seem to be ( WP:ADVOCACY) and ( WP:NPOV). Important suggestions and guidelines editors should review are: ( WP:WORDS) with emphases on ( WP:PUFF), ( MOS:SCAREQUOTES), and ( WP:EDITORIALIZING). Rearete ( talk) 00:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I am aware of all of those guidelines. Please advise what should actually be modified, not general guidance. Otherwise remove the claim of lack of neutrality. Chshmartutyun ( talk) 06:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I have removed some of the verbiage and peacock terms. It still has a promotional feel to it, and I fear my work may have just hidden that a little better. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough
10:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC).
As of March 25, 2021, I noticed several changes that changed verbiage to be exact opposite of previous verbiage, changing the conclusions from the sources to the exact opposite. I have reverted to previous versions. Chshmartutyun ( talk) 01:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Agreed? Ajw522 ( talk) 08:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Larry Agran. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
This article has seen a significant number of edits in a short timespan that coincides with the declaration of Candidacy of the article's subject. Many of these edits provide good references but use words and phrases that are not from a neutral standpoint and seek cast the subject in a light that is not consistent with Wikipedia policy. Those sections referring the Irvine Great Park, in particular, seem to be intent on erasing the documented history of controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.234.230.103 ( talk) 16:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Okay, what should be changed in the OC Great Park section, specifically? Chshmartutyun ( talk) 22:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
For help with understanding maintenance templates please refer to WP:WTRMT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rearete ( talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
After reading the article the relevant policies seem to be ( WP:ADVOCACY) and ( WP:NPOV). Important suggestions and guidelines editors should review are: ( WP:WORDS) with emphases on ( WP:PUFF), ( MOS:SCAREQUOTES), and ( WP:EDITORIALIZING). Rearete ( talk) 00:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I am aware of all of those guidelines. Please advise what should actually be modified, not general guidance. Otherwise remove the claim of lack of neutrality. Chshmartutyun ( talk) 06:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I have removed some of the verbiage and peacock terms. It still has a promotional feel to it, and I fear my work may have just hidden that a little better. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough
10:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC).
As of March 25, 2021, I noticed several changes that changed verbiage to be exact opposite of previous verbiage, changing the conclusions from the sources to the exact opposite. I have reverted to previous versions. Chshmartutyun ( talk) 01:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)