Talk:Mlađan Dinkić
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Iadrian yu in topic B92 About Dinkic
| 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dinkic plays a guitar ? edit
Is it true that Dinkic plays a guitar? I have heard that he plays rock :-). Adrian (talk) 20:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
B92 About Dinkic edit
Hello, I have reverted these edits because I doubt that this data, represented in this form is really for an encyclopedia. It looks like some sort of propaganda, research that was done by some company (the article says it too). If you really insist inserting this data, maybe we can paraphrase it, in a neutral and non-propagandist sense. Greetings. Adrian (talk) 06:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm, Dinkic admitted himself that he lied [1]. Doesn't seem like propaganda to me. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- more accurate wording would be: Mrkonjic and Dinkic record-holders for 'false promises'. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- I understand, I am not saying otherwise, this info is unquestionably OK, but I think it should be written in some sort neutral way, since this is the research and analysis of one single company in Serbia. By Wikipedia standards it can be considered as OR because it is only analyzing and not stating the data about this. Maybe we could write this in a more neutral way, something like " In December 2010 a research by "company name" stated that Dinkic lied to people that and that. " Adrian (talk) 15:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- sure, insert whatever you think is appropriate. in regards to WP:OR, that policy refers to wikipedia editors publishing their own research. it does not refer to independent papers reporting of original research of other entities. b92 is a secondary source in this case. if it was doing a research, it would be primary source (and doing OR, but still not users OR). cheers. 188.2.50.125 (talk) 20:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should be more specific, WP:SYN which makes a part of the wikipedia OR policy. I am not sure if the second sentence that I added is formed very well according to this. What do you think? Do you have some idea or as I inserted it now in the article is OK? Cheers. Adrian (talk) 21:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- therefore, he should be respected sounds weird. else seem fine. 188.2.50.125 (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- I like it like this. A bit too long, but wording is fine. I would leave it until new editors come up with new suggestions. Thanks for corrections. 89.216.196.129 (talk) 08:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)