Jump to content

Talk:Harry Cook (martial artist)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

I removed the PROD, as no evidence was given of non-notability. According to the article, Cook has numerous well-regarded books and videos to his credit, has been interviewed as an expert in his field, etc. I know nothing about martial arts but it really seems to me that the correct way to go about deleting this would be an WP:AFD. It's far too subjective a call for a PROD, IMO. Shawn in Montreal 15:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cook is one of the foremost living scholars on Shotokan Karate, I believe. I have started working on this article. Janggeom (talk) 00:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It now reads like a fan magazine. Cut down on the trivia please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglas M. Smith (talk • contribs) 18:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Feel welcome to contribute to the article, within the limits of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies (see the welcome message I posted on your talk page). Thank you. Janggeom (talk) 23:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article revision

[edit]

I rewrote this article in February 2010. Janggeom (talk) 11:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

[edit]

On 6 May 2011, an anonymous contributor (86.145.249.246) deleted text mentioning Cook's family, with the comment, "BLP edit; irrelevant material removed with reference check." The material which was removed included information about the travels of Cook and his wife in Japan, where both studied Japanese martial arts, and about their children, who also practise martial arts. The implicit assertion appeared to be that the article should contain material only about Cook himself, however other biographies on Wikipedia contain information about family members of the subjects (e.g., see the "Family" or "Personal life" section present in many Wikipedia biographies). I restored the deleted information. On 8 May 2011, Rakufire deleted the restored information and commented, "Surely the family should be allowed to choose whether they wish to be named?" (Rakufire also removed the link to the subject's website from the infobox.) All the information in the article, including people's names and activities, appears in publicly-available sources. If any member of Cook's family does not wish to be named in this article, he/she should contact Wikipedia, prove his/her identity, and make the request. Trust this helps. Janggeom (talk) 07:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing again references to family members on the behest of my sister and mother as well as myself. I and others have repeatedly contacted Wikipedia directly to try and have the issue of multiple reverts resolved over the past two weeks to no action. I have no links to the press reports to back the reason behind up as they are all local publications currently behind paywalls (Hexham Courant specifically.) Proof of identity - *redacted*. All I request is that our names be left off the article - that is all. Dr. Cushty (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for those names to be included in the article, in accord with the policy regarding non-public figures, and WP:BLPNAME - the latter states, The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons.
Dr. Cushty, if you have any further concerns regarding the article, please do not hesitate to email your concern to info-en-q@wikimedia.org - see Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem/Factual error (from subject).
In addition, if I can personally help you with anything, please drop a note on User talk:Chzz. Best,  Chzz  ►  16:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Chzz. I'm editing some of the above out for privacy / legal reasons. 18:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

That's fine - actually, I'll get those old versions removed from the history for you. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  18:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Cook facing 7 charges of sexual assault - Hexham Courant report now online

[edit]

An article confirming that Harry Cook has been remanded in custody on charges of sexual Assault appeared in the Hexham Courant dated 13 May 2011. The article may be found at: http://www.hexhamcourant.co.uk/news/news-at-a-glance/karate-instructor-in-court-1.837648?referrerPath=home Can the semi-protected status please be removed so that the article page may be updated with this information and other updates as they arise. Cook has now been remanded in custody to appear in the Crown Court for sentencing due to the severity of the offences.[redacted] Watchdog2011 08:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)

Watchdog. Do not add unsourced allegations to this talkpage either. I have removed certain aspects of your post, since all pages of WP are covered by WP:BLP.
Thank you for the link. Just to point out that he has been remanded in custody prior to his trial, not his sentencing. Until a trial takes place and he is found guilty, he is considered innocent. We don't know that any offenses have actually take place at present, let alone that they are severe.
Rather than removing the semi-protection, why don't you suggest a sentence to add to the article here? If it gets the agreement of other editors we can add it to the article. My advice to you would be to make it short, and very strictly based on the information in the Hexham article.Slp1 (talk) 12:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to suggest that the article from the Hexham Courant be added as text verbatim. My understanding is that he has <redacted> The article in the Hexham Courant reads as follows "KARATE instructor Henry Wilson Cook, known as Harry Cook, has appeared in court facing seven charges of sexual assault. <redacted> is currently on remand in Durham Prison. He first appeared at Newcastle Magistrates’ Court last Friday, and is due back in court this morning." Watchdog2011 17:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)
Again - you are commenting allegations here that are not in the citation - please stop doing that - you have been asked b4 to stop this - your editing ability is a privilege, please follow guidelines. We are not going to add anything without more details and I would suggest a national report - and or at a minimum charges and really we can happily wait to see if there is a conviction or not and only report it if there is a conviction. Wikipedia should not become the primary source for controversial content about living people. This person is of quite low wikipedia notability as it is. Off2riorob (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can the details of the Hexham Courant now be added to the page as requested above? Watchdog2011 17:28, 17 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)

I am typing four tildes at the end of these edits but for some reason they still show as unsigned - apologies (Watchdog2011 17:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC))

I have removed your addition, Watchdog. Please do not copy and paste material from copyrighted sources. See WP:COPYVIO. It was also most inappropriately placed at the beginning of the article.
I suggested above that you propose a sentence to include here on the talkpage. I still think that is the best way to proceed. It needs to be in your own words, and then we can see if there is consensus to include it. Off2riorob is right that a very small article in a local paper isn't the greatest source for things like this, and as he says, you must stop making unsourced allegations here on the talkpage too. --Slp1 (talk) 21:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Watchdog2011, as a new contributor to Wikipedia, please remember that there are rules and policies that apply to what may be included on Wikipedia. One of the things that cannot be included is speculation, no matter how strongly you may believe or feel that something is the case. This is especially important when criminal allegations are involved and a living person is the subject of those allegations—think of the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle. Even if you might have inside knowledge of some kind, for example, you cannot include contentious material if it is not reliably sourced. Despite being an experienced contributor, I recently found myself in error relating to some edits on this article, so you are by no means the only one who has made mistakes. Please try to understand and cooperate with what Slp1 (administrator) and Off2riorob have written above; thank you. Janggeom (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Janggeom, thank you for your message above. I am very happy with the way the page now reads as it includes the information I was trying to add. I had thought I was doing the correct thing by initially adding only the verbatim text of the newspaper to the page but this was then removed without any explanation of what I had done wrong at that stage. Trying to explain why I wanted the information to appear only let to more difficulty! Very discouraging indeed!! Why is it acceptable in it's present form rather than as the verbatim text I initially added? Maybe too difficult for me to understand I suppose. When there is an update on the case, may I ask for your help in posting the information in an acceptable way? Thanks for trying to help. Watchdog2011 12:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)

Watchdog2011. It is totally incorrect to say that things were removed without explanation. I explained in depth about copyright violations above. I have reverted your positioning of the material in the lede per undue weight. Do not revert this. You have already reverted edits multiple times in the last 24 hours and per WP:3RR, and as Off2riorob warned you, you will likely be blocked if you continue. --Slp1 (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SLp1 I repositioned the material as it had no relevance to the Japan section. It is relevant to the overall introduction at the start of the page, in a position at the end of the introduction which reflects that this is the latest news. Watchdog2011 12:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)

(edit conflict)

Watchdog2011, notice the edit summary here, "remove cut and paste from a copyrighted source. Also inappriately placed per undue weight etc.". Copy/pasting from a newspaper is a copyright infringement. We use references - to show where info comes from - but we don't copy and paste. We do sometimes quote short portions - within quotation marks - but that isn't appropriate here. So, we simply state the fact, and give a reference where the reader can check it. Have a look at Wikipedia:FIRST#And_be_careful_about... - there's other good advice on that page too. And the last part of the edit summary refers to WP:UNDUE. HTH,  Chzz  ►  12:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re. position of the text re. the court case - putting it in the first section gives this fact undue prominence in the article. I understand what you mean about it not fitting under a heading of "Japan", but in fact that heading isn't very helpful anyway, as it covers his career in the UK as well as his Japanese stuff. So, I renamed the section to "Career" - which I hope resolves that concern.  Chzz  ►  13:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for that Chzz - clarity and understanding. Watchdog2011 13:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchdog2011 (talk • contribs)

Further comments re undue weight - in the context of the life and times of Mr. Cook, the report that he appeared in court is not a particularly significant event. That's why it is not appropriate, at this time, to feature it in the very first section. The very brief mention within the body text is more appropriate at this time. IF it transpires that Mr. Cook is convicted, then there might be considerable more published information about the case - and then, it might be appropriate to feature it more prominently - but that's just speculation. We only report what other sources report. Currently, if you search for info on "Harry Cook", you get lots and lots of info about Karate and so forth - mention of this court case is certainly not a prominent feature at this time.  Chzz  ►  13:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Harry Cook. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Harry Cook. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Harry Cook (actor) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harry_Cook_(martial_artist)&oldid=1257559891"