Talk:Talzhemir

Conflict of interest

I don't think the page requires any cleanup to become "neutral point of view" (npov). It really needs independent sources, but I don't think POV is a problem. So I am removing the coi tag. If anyone adds it back, please explain here why it is helpful. thank you, ErikHaugen (talk) 16:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The issue is that the subject herself authored this article, which introduces COI (conflict of interest) and NPOV questions. See Wikipedia:Autobiography for Wikipedia's guideline on this... while it's possible to create an article on oneself that is admissible, it's strongly discouraged due to the inherent issues of objectivity and conflict of interest. -kotra (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I know what COI is, please read what I wrote again. Is the article as it stands now POV? If you feel it is, please identify the problematic parts, I can not find them. Surely an NPOV article written by the subject does not need to have this tag in perpetuity? Not even the tag says this. Please - either make a case for POV here or stop adding these tags. ErikHaugen (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I offended, I was explaining these things mostly for the benefit of other observers, not you. As for POV, I have no specific concerns. My only interest in tagging the article as an autobiography is because, well, that's what it is. Until the article is heavily altered by an independent editor, readers should be able to know that they are reading an autobiography, and make their own judgments on it accordingly. The tags aren't POV accusations, they're just notifications. My main actual concern with the article is that most of it is unsourced, and will probably be deleted eventually if reliable third-party sources aren't added. -kotra (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

No offense taken! If the author added references to make the article well-sourced and the tone/etc was not POV, would you insist on this tag until the article was "heavily altered by an independent editor?" "My main actual concern with the article is that most of it is unsourced" - mine, too, which is why I added the refimprove tag. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't really insist on anything in Wikipedia, because I value the collaborative model, but yes I would probably argue for an autobiography tag even then, at least on the talk page. I consider the tag an informative service to both readers and editors, and it's simply and neutrally written to not accuse the subject of any impropriety, or actually claim the article suffers from POV problems. To be honest, though, I've probably had too much past experience with this subject matter to be unbiased myself, so my opinion here may be also tainted. For this reason I've tried to stay away from these Talzhemir and 'Manda articles on Wikipedia for the past few years (and there have been several, all eventually deleted). So if you think my opinion is unreasonable, I encourage you to remove the tags I added; I won't re-add them (though someone else might). -kotra (talk) 18:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with one on the talk page, see {{Notable Wikipedian}} above, but the tags on the article itself seem to be designed for drawing attention to problems that need to be fixed. Thanks, ErikHaugen (talk) 19:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)