User talk:Anapologetos

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Anapologetos! I am SU Linguist, and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! It seems like no one has actually welcomed you yet, though you've been contributing for a while. Keep up the good work! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! SU Linguist 15:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Managed Security Service Provider

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Managed Security Service Provider, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Managed Security Service Provider

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 18:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Managed Security Service Provider

I have nominated Managed Security Service Provider, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Managed Security Service Provider. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 14:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Tribes Mission

Just to give you a heads up: I reverted your most recent edit, and one you made in 2008, to New Tribes Mission, an article you've extensively edited. In the most recent revision I undid, you had removed a sourced statement that (while neutrally worded), might be seen as critical to NTM; the edit summary you gave didn't match, as you didn't mention you had removed the citation, but had just introduced the word "former", citing POV concerns. It's also worth mentioning that the individual was a member at the time, but that the organisation distanced themselves from him as a result of the allegation, so the addition of "former" isn't necessarily accurate when talking about the event. In the 2008 revision, you raised concerns about the statements from Survival International, but the cited statement you removed was actually from Norman Lewis, who is a reliable source. And the statement wasn't restored when your sourcing concerns about Survival International were satisfied (it's also considered a reliable source).

I'm curious as to whether you have a connection with New Tribes Mission, either directly or indirectly. It's alright if you do, and you're still free to edit the article, but you might want to read Wikipedia's guideline on Conflict of Interest editing. And while I'm sure you were editing in good faith, I'd be remiss if I didn't say that Wikipedia is not a place to engage in apologetics, especially in a case like NTM, where critical (but reliable) sources abound. In this case, WP:UNDUE doesn't apply as much, because the criticism is primarily why it's notable enough to included on Wikipedia, to be honest.

I'd like to see the article revised more for balance, and the criticism perhaps more integrated, but a lot has been done in recent history to make it more neutral. Previously, it read a bit like a PR fluff piece (and it still does in some places, especially where primary sources are used). Your help in that regard would be very much be appreciated, as this is obviously an area of interest for you. But try not to remove reliably citated information from the article, without a compelling reason- especially without discussing it on the talk page first to achieve consensus. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 02:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]