Talk:Mark Gerban

re:Discrimination section

This section sounds like only one side of the story. Were there any English language reliable sources that discussed this conflict? If not, it might be best to leave it out. --Mblumber (talk) 20:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

So it appears that now various anonymous editors have added additional information about a conflict that played out on The Triangle's opinion pages. I don't believe taht this conflict has anything to do with Marc Gerban the athlete and so it really doesn't belong here. If you disagree please post here. --Mblumber (talk) 04:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

This issue seems relevant to Mark Gerban's history as an athlete, as it explains he left the United States because of discriminatory issues. As mentioned in one of his sources, the idea of Mark rowing for the State of Palestine started with the reaction he received from his commentary at Drexel. -09:19 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.213.149 (talk) 14:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I like what you added. It's fairly close to the line of being biased, but I don't know any way (short of original research) to find the other side of the story. At least it's not off-topic. --Mblumber (talk) 04:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

While the soapbox nature of the Discrimination & Inequality section is a problem that needs editing, I don’t think that the content is inherently non-neutral. However, the name of the section is not neutral because it adopts Gerban’s view that he suffered discrimination. The name of the section should be changed to something neutral like “Media Controversy & Decision to row for Palestine.” Despite the glaring conflict of interest that comes from the subject of the article contributing to it, I disagree that discussion of the Drexel and Malta controversies don’t belong in the article. Inclusion of this content is justified simply because coverage of these controversies by secondary sources makes it verifiable. It is appropriate to document what secondary sources report because these controversies are relevant to Gerban's notability as a rower for Palestine. Ciricula (talk) 16:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Improper deletion of content from Malta Boat Club

Note: this was cross-posted on the following talk pages:Talk:Malta Boat Club, Talk:Mark Gerban , User talk:98.225.175.227, User talk:Phil marcella, and User talk:108.2.200.127

Dear User of accounts 98.225.175.227, Phil marcella, and 108.2.200.127:

I write specifically to seek your explanation for the section blanking edits made to Malta Boat Club at 15:35, 23 May 2010 (see bulleted summary of edits -- "Problematic pattern of edits" below).

I added the see also section with the link to Mark Gerban to the Malta Boat Club article because, as I noted in my edit summary, it is "useful for readers seeking to read as much about a topic [Malta Boat Club] as possible, including subjects only peripherally related." See WP:ALSO. Unless I hear otherwise, I am going to revert your edit.

More important concerns

Most importantly, I also write to express concern, and alert you, that you appear to be infringing on several Wikipedia policies – I assume unintentionally.

Summary of violations

I have enumerated some those polices below, but I will summarize them in layman’s terms by saying this:

As your edits (bulleted below) reveal, you are attempting to edit content about an alleged controversy between Malta Boat Club and Mark Gerban. Given that the majority of your edits are limited to this very narrow issue, it appears you may have a bias and that your edits violate the conflict of interest policy.

Aside from any personal connection to the subject of these articles you might have, the manner in which you have been editing these subjects violates other policies against: (1) deleting the same content without explanation (edit warring), (2) making edits from different accounts (sock puppetry), (3) making non-neutral edits assessing Mark Gerban’s rowing ability, and (4) let me emphasize that it is prohibited to make edits to advance or defend the interest of an organization like Malta Boat Club.

Applicable Policies

1. An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about some aspect of the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions, rather than try to resolve the disagreement by discussion. Edit warring is unconstructive and creates animosity between editors, making it harder to reach a consensus as to the right way to improve the encyclopedia. Users who engage in edit wars risk being blocked or even banned from editing. See WP:EW.
2. Contributing to the same page with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way to suggest that they are multiple people. Contributions to the same page with clearly linked legitimate alternate accounts is not forbidden. See WP:ILLEGIT.
3. Neutral point of view (NPOV) is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors. See WP:NPOV. Furthermore, the neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting perspectives on a particular topic. It requires that all majority views and significant minority views published by reliable sources be presented fairly, in a disinterested tone, and in rough proportion to their prevalence within the source material. Therefore, material should not be removed solely on the grounds that it is "POV", although it may be shortened and moved to a new article if it gives undue weight to a minor point of view, as explained below. See WP:YESPOV.
4. A Wikipedia conflict of interest (COI) is an incompatibility between the aim of Wikipedia, which is to produce a neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia, and the aims of an individual editor. COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest. See WP:COI.

Problematic pattern of edits

• 15:35, 23 May 2010 (user: 108.2.200.127 blanked restored section in Malta Boat Club article with link to Mark Gerban for the second time)

• 15:34, 23 May 2010 (user: 108.2.200.127 edited Mark Gerban article to be more neutral towards Malta Boat Club)

• 12:05, 25 April 2010 (user: Phil marcella blanked restored section in Malta Boat Club article with link to Mark Gerban article – edit summary “See also: Mark Gerban is NOT a member of the club.”)

• 12:00, 25 April 2010 (user:98.225.175.227 blanked section in Malta Boat Club article with link to Mark Gerban article)

• 11:55, 25 April 2010 (user:98.225.175.227 added unreferenced commentary to Mark Gerban article –“He was not considered a good rower by US standards”)

• 11:53, 25 April 2010 (user:98.225.175.227 added unreferenced content to Mark Gerban article – “Mark tried unsuccessfully to make the United States National Team for several years, as a result he he knew he could get a spot on the Palestinian Rowing National Team since there were no other competitors”)

• 11:49, 25 April 2010 (user:98.225.175.227 deleted content in Mark Gerban article referring to conflict with Malta Boat Club)

I’m here to help

As this long note proves, I am willing to take the time to help you sort out any issues with the Mark Gerban article if that is where your underlying concern is, but those content concerns must be discussed, rather than repeatedly edited unilaterally. Also, while your privacy is paramount, you should disclose that you have a connection with the subject of the article if you are participating in shaping its content, even on the talk pages.

Thanks,

Ciricula (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mark Gerban. 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/20090422113753/http://www.worldrowing.com/display/modules/news/dspNews.php?newid=324347 to http://www.worldrowing.com/display/modules/news/dspNews.php?newid=324347
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081202001053/http://www.worldrowing.com/display/modules/news/dspNews.php?newid=324226 to http://www.worldrowing.com/display/modules/news/dspNews.php?newid=324226
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090422000149/http://www.rudern1.de/Rowing1/2005/08/Mark_Gerban.php to http://www.rudern1.de/Rowing1/2005/08/Mark_Gerban.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100103050433/http://worldrowing.com/medias/docs/media_350450.pdf to http://www.worldrowing.com/medias/docs/media_350450.pdf

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) 05:25, 18 January 2018 (UTC)