| 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 C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
Seems pretty biased and promotional edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article seems like it's a promotion advert for d'Entremont and seems to include a lot of non-notable details and peacock type stuff. SageRad (talk)
Which pieces do you find objectionable? Maggie mcgarvey (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
SourceWatch edit
@McSly, Tryptofish, Kingofaces43, and 188.87.238.162:
Hello, everyone. This is an attempt to resolve the dispute regarding the SourceWatch external link that has been the subject of one addition, and multiple reversions.
Here are the facts:
- SourceWatch is run by the nonprofit, progressive watchdog and advocacy group, the Center for Media and Democracy.
- SourceWatch, as a wiki, is much like Wikipedia: the articles in question can be edited, though one needs a account, and must request one from administration, to be able to edit.
- As a matter of policy, WP:ELNO reminds us that: "Open wikis [should normally not serve as external links], except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors."
- The stability and number of editors of SourceWatch is unknown to this editor.
I would like to hear some opinions on this matter. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:09, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Never mind, everyone. Editor has been blocked for 24 hours. Sorry to bother y'all. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for starting the talk section, nevertheless. There is really no question that the link is inappropriate. I've already reverted the IP three times, and even though it's probably the kind of thing that is exempted from 3RR, I'd rather not do it a fourth time. Could someone else fix the page please? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Don't mention it. I'll do it.
I've only reverted once.— Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) (signing again: — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:17, 9 June 2018 (UTC))- Turns out I haven't reverted anything on the article at all. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Don't mention it. I'll do it.
- Thanks for starting the talk section, nevertheless. There is really no question that the link is inappropriate. I've already reverted the IP three times, and even though it's probably the kind of thing that is exempted from 3RR, I'd rather not do it a fourth time. Could someone else fix the page please? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:14, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Never mind, everyone. Editor has been blocked for 24 hours. Sorry to bother y'all. — Javert2113 (talk; please ping me in your reply on this page) 18:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC)