LLThom

Removal of sourced accounts? LLThom (talk) 23:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

If you mean my comment about the sourced content removed by WR Drews from the Martha Rofheart article, that was a mistake on my part; I hadn't noticed that that content likely wasn't about Rofheart at all. That wasn't necessarily Evanada's error, though - he created a draft in his sandbox that may well have been moved before Evanada wanted it to. I too have had half-finished drafts in my sandbox that weren't fit for the mainspace.

Some general remarks on talk pages: If you want to reply to me, there's no need to use the {{help me}} template; I'm watching this page and will see it when you reply. If you want to make doubly sure that someone else sees that you replied to them on your talk page, the best way is the {{talkback}} template which you can add to the other's talk page. The {{help me}} template will summon random helpers from all over Wikipedia, and I don't think "Removal of sourced accounts?" would be sufficient context for most of them. Also, we usually add new comments at the bottom (or at least below the one we reply to) so that one can read discussions from top to bottom in roughly chronological order. Huon (talk) 00:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the account below, the "personal account" regarding plagiarism was sourced; it was actually the account of Dr David A Cook, Department of Broadcasting and Cinema, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, published in the Times of London. This is a far more reliable source than those used by Evananda -- which are, for the most part, personal opinions, not fact. I would still like to know why a professor's valid account, which was corroborated by novelist Sharon Kay Penman, should be less reliable than the puffery presented by Evananda. As previously, his embarassment over his mother's plagiarism is understandable, but should not be used as an excuse for him to remove content.

On the Wiki entry for novelist Martha Rofheart, user Evananda keeps deleting the facts of Rofheart's plagiarism of several authors, then replacing the text with unsubstantiated hype. Evananda is the original creator of the entry. He created the entry by copying and pasting the entry for Mary Renault, but forgot, or didn't care, to delete the portion which referred to Renault, not Rofheart. Evananda is actually Evan Rofheart, an East Hampton faith healer who is Martha Rofheart's only child. While his distress over his mother's plagiarism is understandable, it should not be allowed to obscure the fact that she plagiarised at least five authors in at least two of her novels. LLThom (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

None of Evananda's 2013 edits remved anything of that kind. The plagiarism account removed back in 2009 sounded like a personal account. No reliable source for the plagiarism account was given (or at least not enough detail to find the source), and the user who had added it removed sourced content in the process. Besides, the removed account only mentions plagiarism from two authors. If you want to re-add the content, you should add a reliable source, preferably one that's available online so that our readers can easily verify it. If Evananda indeed keeps removing the content when it cites sources (up to now he removed it but once, which isn't quite "keeps deleting"), you should raise the issue on the article's talk page, and if that doesn't help, WP:Dispute resolution would be the way to go. Huon (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia article feedback widget

What happened to the Wiki article feedback widget? It doesn't show on any article recently. LLThom (talk) 15:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Article feedback: The community decided that the feedback tool should not be activated globally; it's still on some pages such as Golden-crowned Sparrow. The full list of tagged articles is at Category:Article Feedback 5 and Category:Article Feedback 5 Additional Articles‎. Huon (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

According to this, you can turn it on for a particular article by adding Category:Article Feedback 5 to the page. JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)