Wikipedia

Talk:Michael Woroniecki

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Community Tech bot in topic A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
Learn more about this page


Associated Content

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Re this edit:

This material was not properly cited, but there are far bigger issues.

This article is a biography of a living person, subject to our stringent sourcing policy for such material. The source cited (such as it was) "according to the article Woroniecki Family in Times Square on Associated Content.com", later quoting "the author". Associated Content did not "have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy". The content was generated entirely by site users. The website had some editorial control over content, but did not in any way vet submission or fact check. This is not a reliable source. If you disagree, please take the issue to the reliable sources noticeboard for determination before restoring the material.

Woroniecki is a controversial figure. Unsourced and poorly sourced material will be removed on sight. Per WP:BLP, editors restoring the material are responsible for the material's compliance with our policies. Edit warring guidelines apply to those restoring the material, but do not apply to good faith efforts to enforce our WP:BLP policy. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:31, 12 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello SummerPhD,
Thank you for the detailed explanation. I did go and read all the appropriate Wikipedia guidelines on the issue of reliable sources and I understand now where you are coming from. I agree that the material was not properly cited and needs fixing. I did some basic research and discovered that Associated Content was acquired by Yahoo in 2010 and launched in 2011 as Yahoo! Voices. Yahoo introduced new Submission Guidelines (for some reason, I can't get the link to work from that page here but you can search it in Yahoo for reference), retired 75,000 articles that were outdated and retired older content that did not meet the new guidelines. One of the new guidelines is to "Be accurate and cite your sources", requiring contributors to list and submit authoritative sources in a way that can be accessed easily by readers. It also accepts the firsthand, personal experience of the contributor as a reliable source, when the material or content published allows for such.
I searched on Yahoo!Voices for the article that was supposedly the source for those sentences and here it is: Woroniecki Family in Times Square. Since the article was written after AC was acquired by Yahoo and the new rules were put into place, it is a relatively reliable source, given that the material that it is supporting does not make any "extraordinary claims", is not "damaging" to the subject, is not "contentious", per WP:RS and keeps the article current and relevant. All the Wikipedia guidelines on sources allow for their common sense application, depending on the material they are purported to verify. Obviously, this type of source could not be used to support a statement such as "Woroniecki has a doctorate in Theology" or "Woroniecki was present during the Yates trial". But, according to all the Wiki rules I have read, it is sufficient, under "Currently", to place Woroniecki in New York in 2010 and a third party perspective of the gist of Woroniecki's current, then, message.
I did as you suggested and posted the source in question on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Since then, I did the research on my own and managed to answer our question :-). Since Wikipedia encourages us to try and find sources for un-cited material that we believe is verifiable, per WP:V, as opposed to just removing it, it makes sense to me to restore that content, now having an appropriate cite. So, I will rewrite that part of the article to bring it into compliance and make sure it's sourced correctly. Thank you for helping sort it all out!
JesHelpin (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Associated Content was -- and Yahoo Voices is -- not a reliable source, it is a self-published source. Per our policy on biographies of living persons: "Never use self-published sources – including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets – as sources of material about a living person." The "third party perspective" is the perspective of one non-notable individual on a living person. In addition to being unacceptably sourced, it is trivial. Heck, I could go to Yahoo Voices right now and give my "perspective" on the subject, as could anyone who loves or hates the guy enough to bother. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:08, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Per my discussion here and similar findings at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Using_Yahoo_Voices_as_a_source, the Associated Content material has to go. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I apologize if I seem dense, but why are you still saying that Yahoo! Voices is a "self-published" source? It is not. Articles must be submitted for review before they will be published. Articles that carried over were submitted to the same review and edited into compliance. Not just "anyone" could go on there and write about another person, either a promotion or a rant. It is specifically prohibited. As far as the author of the Voices article not being "notable", I don't believe that is a requirement to write that you saw someone at a certain place and time and what you heard them say. Yes, a certain degree of notability would be required for a legal, medical or psychological statement or opinion. But this content is not that. Again, according to Wiki, WP:RS, context and content can determine whether or not a source is "reliable". JesHelpin (talk) 16:14, 18 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
I am saying, as the noticeboard found, that the site does NOT have a "reputation for fact checking and accuracy" and is essentially an SPS. This is a WP:BLP, such sources are not acceptable. If the material is fundamental to a notable subject, it will be available in reliable sources. If it is not, either the material is not a significant aspect of the subject or the subject is not notable. This subject is on the cusp of being a WP:BLP1E: Were it not for his connection to the killings, this article likely would not exist. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Woroniecki. 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).

  • 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) 06:47, 10 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Michael Woroniecki. 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).

  • 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) 21:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Michael Woroniecki. 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).

  • 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) 15:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Woroniecki&oldid=1216703552"