Talk:Lauren Greenfield/Archives/2013

Self-promotion

This article reads like it was written by Lauren's agent and doesn't even follow style guidelines. Someone please clean it up! --184.189.232.125 (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Appears to be taken from the Lauren Greenfield Facebook page. Certainly biased. Jrw1234 (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrw1234 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Agree. I added a "Like resume" template. 69.255.153.126 (talk) 12:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I think we need specific objections to justify the two templates that have been added to the article concerning "conflict of interest" hence I am going to take the liberty of removing these templates. To me the article seems well-written and well-supported by sources. Bus stop (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The name of the account creating this article is "Frank Evers." That is also the name of the husband of the subject. Also, the article has been heavily edited by a WP:SPA IP address based in Venice, California, where the subject resides. It appears that most of the content in this article has been provided by a person or persons closely associated with the subject. Logical Cowboy (talk) 06:07, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

We can't change the name of User that created the article, and there seems to be no reason to nullify the edits that you say originate in Venice, California. How do you propose to remedy the "problem" that you feel you have identified? Bus stop (talk) 13:07, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand the question, sorry. Obviously we can't change the identity of the editor(s) with the COI. It doesn't make sense to suggest that. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the article was created by a User "Frank Evers" as you assert above, although an editor by that name does join the editing history early on. The tag which you placed on the article requires justification, in my opinion. Do you find justification for the tag in any part of the content of the article? Are you seeing anything in the content of the article that would justify the tag you have added? Bus stop (talk) 21:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Oops, you are right about "Frank Evers," sorry. I see the article as largely being a link farm, pointing to various places on the subject's own website, the subject's agency's website, or the subject's videos on a hosting site. This is a very promotional article, relying heavily on non-reliable sources. Before the WP:COI tag is removed, I think that the promotional (spam) links should be trimmed back. Also, I think that the WP:SPA editor(s) working on this site should be asked to declare their COI so we are not all guessing about this. Logical Cowboy (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)