Talk:John Defterios
| 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
[edit]There seems to be an overt attempt by user Yk Yk Yk to prevent anybody who attempts to make edits to their edits from making these edits. Some of his content is not supported by their sources. I have tried change this the article so that it equally represents each section of his history. I have not affiliation with the subject. I think it would be more of a neutral article if the bio was either lengthen to include addition content on the subject or limited and some of the non neutral content reduced or removed.~~Ga8thds~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ga8thds (talk • contribs) 03:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- If only your edits were reliably sourced, they will be accepted. But as I pointed out many times, you added poorly sourced information, and that is more unacceptable than having a reliably-sourced negative section seemingly carrying more weight (a claim which I disagree with). There is no intent to antagonize Mr Defterios here. We are here to add well-referenced information. You, on the other hand, operate a single-purpose account with the narrow cause of trying make Mr Defterios look better after the recent controversy. If nobody added the FBC scandal to this article, I'm sure you would have been happy to leave it out. Does that make you a neutral editor?
- The only paragraph with negative information is concise, emphasizing key events to provide sufficient context, neutrally presented, and supported by multiple reliable sources.
- Would you care to point out which of my additions are not sourced? —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 03:34, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding this source [1] from the Stern Stewart Institute, all of the information about FBC was excised after the scandal broke. Some of the information that was previously on the page (Access date: 2011-08-05) included:
- 1) World Business won a Grand Prix Award in Europe for best global business and financial program
- 2) FBC conducted global communication campaigns on behalf of governments, non-governmental organizations, etc
- No. 2 was particularly damaging to Mr Defterios' defense and I'm sure as a PR man he moved quickly to have it removed and then sent you to play soccer here with the goalposts moved. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 03:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Edit request on 23 December 2011
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"In August 2011, BBC and CNBC cancelled all FBC-produced shows on their programming after it was revealed that the company doubled as a public relations firm for the government of Malaysia, and carried puff pieces in the shows it produced."
The word "puff" was—contrary to the source quoted—censored by Ga8thds; the current sentence doesn't make sense. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 08:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Done --Mkativerata (talk) 08:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Edit request on 23 December 2011
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add {{pp-protected|expiry=07:48, 22 June 2012}} to the top of the page. Thanks. →Στc. 23:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for picking that up. I've used the less intrusive small lock. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Image to add
[edit]
Just checking first in view of the full protection - is it OK for me to add this image to the article? January (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- (Non-admin) Should be fine. — Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 19:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Edit request 28 March, 2012
[edit]Defterios should be put in Category:University of Southern California alumni.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Defterios. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120128085826/http://www.weforum.org/contributors/john-k-defterios to http://www.weforum.org/contributors/john-k-defterios
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) 13:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC)