Talk:Heritage Auctions

Shameful

This article, of which I've made a pass at trimming WP:PEACOCK and promotional language, is a blatant, shameful advertisement for Heritage. I would seriously ask anyone connected with Heritage to stay away from what is supposed to be an objective, neutral encyclopedia article. If it takes admin intervention to enforce this, then that's what it will be. Outside, unbiased, disinterested parties are the only people who should be editing this article, which at present suffers from a multitude of policy and guideline violations. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Auction highlights noted in the mass media

This section needs to be trimmed severely. There is no criteria for inclusion, other than some editor's POV. Being noted in the mass media is not a valid criterion in and of itself, since many outlets simply publish reworded press releases. Reliably cited record-setting auctions in particular categories may be one objective criterion. As of now, however, this section is simply promotional in nature. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:01, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

The criterion for inclusion is that an auctioned-off item was deemed significant enough by the mass media to be prominently publicized by them, such as Babe Ruth's bat or the prototype Batmobile. My (and an attorney friend's) interpretation of Wikipedia's terms of use suggests that this section should remain, but we do prefer your idea of only mentioning record-setting incidents. Also, nobody seemed to object to listing frivolous pending lawsuits - even those later resolved in Heritage's favor, even though such entries are a BLATANT violation of Wikipedia's terms of use and could subject the contributors to costly libel lawsuits. I have no affiliation whatsoever with Heritage Auctions, but I am a collectibles fan.--R&BpopROCK (talk) 13:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your work in trying to set some sort of objective criterion. While any specific figure, including $1 million, is arbitrary, I see it as a good-faith attempt and other editors can weigh in if they want to see it changed or refined.

Despite your being an SPA, I take you at your word you are not affiliated with Heritage but are "a collectibles fan." Full-disclosure: I've bought several items from Heritage and everything has gone utterly smoothly and professionally. However, if you are not affiliated with Heritage I'm curious as to why you would have an attorney look over the page. I'd also like you to link to the Wikipedia policy or guideline you say forbids mention of lawsuits reported in the press and that are part of the public record.

I'd also like to ask, if you have no affiliation with Heritage, why you would make the implied threat that someone — you? with your lawyer friend? — might plant to sue Wikipedia contributors for libel. It's particularly interesting to me as a journalist, since I and I'm sure you lawyer friend knows that truth is the defense against libel claims ... and that it is no way to libelous to report lawsuits — public documents — that have been filed. So if you, first, could link to the Wikipedia "terms" (I presume you mean guideline or policy?), that would be helpful. And secondly, since attorneys specialize in different fields and perhaps your friend is a divorce lawyer or an environmental lawyer and not a First Amendment lawyer, perhaps he might clarify how reporting of a filed public-document lawsuit is libelous. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:35, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your polite response. To avoid additional misunderstandings, I will no longer be contributing to the Heritage Auctions article. Feel free to edit it as you see fit. In response to your questions and concerns, I repeat that I am in no way affiliated with Heritage Auctions. I defended Heritage merely because I am a "trickle-down" conservative and a collectibles fan who had felt that they were being bullied by well-meaning but misinformed critics. I did not threaten anyone with litigation. I merely pointed out that certain of the posts could subject the contributor(s) to costly libel lawsuits because they included out-of-date and possibly misleading information, whether negligently or intentionally. The truth can often be an absolute defense against defamation lawsuits, but it can still subject a contributor to civil liability - for example, if its is used in a misleading way, whether deliberately or not. You may sue anyone, including Heritage, for any reason but that does not mean that your case has legal merit. The lawsuits previously cited in the Heritage Auctions article were merely allegations (frivolous ones, in my view) and, thus, not acceptable for publication on this website, as per Wikipedia's terms of use. In addition, most of not all of the lawsuits had already been resolved in Heritage's favor. My attorney friend used to be a high-ranking judge who had heard hundreds of major civil and criminal cases. I apologize for any trouble that I may have caused you or any other contributor. Again, I will no longer post on Heritage Auction's main article.--R&BpopROCK (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. Everyone is free to edit any article, and obviously you can edit this anytime you like, so please don't feel as if you cannot.

We all do have to abide by Wikipedia guidelines and policies, of course, and in the years I've been here, I'm unfamiliar with any such guideline or policy prohibiting inclusion of a reliably cited lawsuit. If the article subject won the suit, that obviously should be included. But the fact of a suit itself, particularly a high-profile one covered in mass media on multiple continents, is perfectly acceptable. With all respect, one's personal opinion about the suit does not enter into this whatsoever.

"I merely pointed out that certain of the posts could subject the contributor(s) to costly libel lawsuits" seems like a tacit threat. And it is certainly a way of warning off and trying to intimidate other editors.

This article has been problematic for a long time, and despite patchwork over the years, still requires much work. I don't know what it is about it, other than Heritage people itself coming here at some points. Some articles just are. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your additional reply and respect your views. I will not again edit the Heritage Auctions article because I do not want to risk being falsely accused yet again. All of the referenced lawsuits were adjudicated in Heritage's favor. Even if they were not, they were merely unproven allegations and thus do not belong in any encyclopedia. You may want to review the article, "Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons". Even though the article applies to individuals rather than companies, the same principles apply regarding what is acceptable for publication in Wikipedia. Regardless of Wikipedia's policies, the law is what counts. You may sue anyone for any reason, so my prior comments were not intended to be threatening but rather were meant to warn contributors of possible costly litigation involving plaintiffs who may not agree with your viewpoints (I am aware of several such suits). I have personally been threatened with such litigation by a notoriously litigious investment corporation, even though everything that I had published about the lawsuits against them was true. I agree that many companies unjustly use Wikipedia for free advertising, just as their competitors and disgruntled customers use the site to unfairly damage their reputations.--R&BpopROCK (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

And I yours. I'm afraid, however, that the policy at Biographies of living persons, aside from not applying to business and corporations, only mentions that we should avoid mentions of alleged crimes by relatively low-profile individuals who are not convicted. Aside from the inapplicability to subjects that are not living people, civil cases are not crimes. And in the case of the Mongolian dinosaur fossil, when Heritage and the Mongolian government themselves issued a joint press release announcing a satisfactory conclusion, this high-profile case that made international news absolutely should be included. Although, equally clearly, not in the way it was presented, which used weasel words like "reportedly." The mention can be made neutral; it'll just take work and I'm not quite up to it at the moment. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I cannot speak for Heritage Auctions, but I do know of corporate bullies who would potentially sue almost any user who had posted negative information about them, even if it was true. Said bullies' lawyers would spin the law and even Wikipedia's terms of use, such as the Biographies of living persons, to make them apply. The user defendant would then have to pay six figures in legal fees just to defend the litigation if it was not dismissed on a summary judgement. I have no idea about how Heritage or many other corporations stand on this matter, but I was merely warning users of the possible dangers. On another website, I was forced to delete my verifiably truthful posts about a corporation's lawsuits after I had received direct lawsuit threats from them. The corporation claimed that just mentioning the lawsuits was misleading and, thus, legally actionable. I am not a martyr, but I am also not your boss, and I apologize if my prior posts suggested otherwise.--R&BpopROCK (talk) 13:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Dear Tenebrae. You wonder why there is so much turbulence on this page. If we were sitting together over a cup of coffee there's much I could say. But here, where the wrong people could overhear? Not so much. There's no way to provide cites or evidence for whispers or deeds done in the dark. That's one reason lawsuits fail, but not proving the case doesn't equate to innocence. I think BpopROCK is a - what's that word? "Shill". — Preceding unsigned comment added by INoIta112 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Ankdih gow

Ankdih

Block / Tehsil → Masturi

District → Bilaspur

State → Chhattisgarh

About Ankdih

According to Census 2011 information the location code or village code of Ankdih village is 438855. Ankdih village is located in Masturi Tehsil of Bilaspur district in Chhattisgarh, India. It is situated 3km away from sub-district headquarter Masturi and 22km away from district headquarter Bilaspur. As per 2009 stats, Ankhdih is the gram panchayat of Ankdih village.

The total geographical area of village is 238.04 hectares. Ankdih has a total population of 1,173 peoples. There are about 292 houses in Ankdih village. Bilaspur is nearest town to Ankdih which is approximately 22km away.

Google Map of Ankdih

The Map data on this website is provided by Google Maps, a free online map service one can access and view in a web browser.

Population of Ankdih

Total Population Male Population Female Population 1,173 599 574

Connectivity of Ankdih

Type Status Public Bus Service Available Private Bus Service Available within <5 km distance Railway Station Available within 10+ km distance

Nearby Villages of Ankdih

Chauha Daldali Khorasi Pendari Masturi Koni Sargawan Parsadabed Pali Entawa Mudpar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandan manjhi (talk • contribs) 09:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heritage Auctions. 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/20111209134707/http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_CEO/2011/November/Rich_Heritage_Auctions.aspx to http://www.dmagazine.com/Home/D_CEO/2011/November/Rich_Heritage_Auctions.aspx

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Karl Jobst

Karl Jobst released a new video about Heritage Auctions. I think that it is important to put into the article