User talk:Athom1790

Concerns regarding POV/neutrality and lack of citations for recent sections

You have added a number of sections to some related articles on strength athletics. The sections in question are about the integrity and operation of various individuals and organisations. The sections have been titled much like headlines in a newspaper. Examples include: IRONMIND CONTINUES IT ROLE AS THE PROPOGANDA WING OF IFSA DBA CHAMPIONS STRONGMAN LEAGUE, IFSA TURNS TO CRIME; CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION; and INTEGRITY OF ARNOLD STRONGMAN CLASSIC IN QUESTION. The articles in question are: Arnold Strongman Classic; Strongman Champions League; Fortissimus; IronMind; International Federation of Strength Athletes.

Whilst I do not dispute that a well-rounded article should contain reference to such issues I am concerned about the way it has been presented, i.e. that the facts are not being presented in a neutral way and I believe they violate Wikipedia’s rules on neutrality. The sectiona are also written in an inflammatory way. I think the sections ought to be rewritten from a neutral standpoint and that they should have citations. The talk pages are a place to discuss the issues, but given the number of articles involved perhaps a central discussion here is better.Kwib (talk) 22:52, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to add my support to Kwib's point, and to say he/she is handling this in a very polite way. If you have citations and are willing to write this in a neutral way, then by all means this is valid and notable information that can be added. But repeatedly adding this in this form after it is deleted is borderline vandalism. --Muhandes (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]