Talk:Majora Carter

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.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Givechase (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection.

Copyright issue?

An awful lot of this seems to be verbatim from the MacArthur mini-bio. - Jmabel | Talk 09:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)\[reply]

torch bearer out

Free Quebec, Free Basque, Free Iraq, Free Northern Ireland, Free Palestine, etc... Everybody has his/her own pet political slogan. Olympics is simply not the venue for this. The torch bearers have signed contract pledging not using Olympic venue for political or religious causes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptr123 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

she does not know what is Tibet.

If you really really know what are real real real Tibet, pls go to there yourself. Don't always tend be an expert on Human Rights! fucking SHAM one. Could you offer some best ways to sovle the environmental problems? Just know how to bark! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.191.168.13 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a mechanism for PR for Majora Carter or any of the organizations with which she is involved. There is a repeated pattern of inserting information about her where it is inappropriate in multiple encyclopedia articles. Please respect Wikipedia and stop co-opting it for selfish purposes. Drawn Some (talk) 19:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i apologize, and will from now on cite respected journalistic sources before putting up what have always been facts related to Majora - despite your distaste for said facts. your criteria for "inappropriate" information is vague however. do you apply the same criteria to pop stars, corp executives and social justice activists alike? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 19:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic torch incident

I don’t see why this has been repeatedly deleted by Drawn Some, claiming it is “irrelevant” and “incidental.” Given that it is something done by the subject of the article that received significant media attention across the US, I think it is highly relevant, and to dismissis it as merely “incidental” strikes me as rather bizarre. It was significant enough to receive widespread media attention; it should merit mention in her biography. -- Irn (talk) 20:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a biography. It is an encyclopedia article. It is evident from edits and comments that Majora Carter is using this article as an advertisement. It actually had more photos than some articles on recent presidents. Please stop using Wikipedia as a PR tool. When you write her biography you may include the name of her Head Start teacher and the award she got for speaking to Miss Kimball's science class at P.S. 197 as well as what she eats for breakfast. Otherwise please only include relevant, important, well-sourced information.

Please also note that one of the references is an alumni magazine and that the source for that article was primarily Majora Carter.

Why don't you worry more about documenting her birthdate and other core info from a reliable source instead of including irrelevant material? Drawn Some (talk) 20:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few points: (1) Please familiarize yourself with some of wikipedia's key guidelines and policies, particularly assuming good faith, being civil, and avoiding personal attacks. (2) Biographies are not merely books; this is an encyclopedia article and a biography (just take a look at the top of this page). (3) Do you have any proof that Ms. Carter herself has had anything to do with this article or are you simply making baseless attacks on your assumptions? Because it is not evident to me that she has had anything to do with this article. And, most importantly, (4) you did not answer my objections; you repeated your claim that it is "irrelevant" but you have provided no support for this claim; you further implied that it was not "relevant, important, [or] well-sourced." Do you have any arguments to support this assertion? Why should this incident be left out of the article? -- Irn (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To "Drwn Some": so the NYTimes and the NY Post both documenting the same event which Carter then relates to her environmental justice (ie civil rights) work is in your opinion not relevent? Who took down the "Awards" section here? are they not relvent. I looked at Sean Combs wikipedia page; he gets awards listed and lots of pictures - while promoting misogyny and at times violence? Why can't Majora Carter be documented for the non-partisan, pro-human work she is doing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 18:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PHOTOS

so, what kind and exactly how many photos of Majora Carter, her work, etc, are acceptable, and what is the criteria exactly? I notice that actors get many pics on wikipedia, and since Majora Carter has been on Sundance Channel for 2 years now i would expect she can have a photo of that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 02:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWARDS

do awards count as relevant information Drawn Some? i would like to have a strict guideline before i go through a reference every one of them as instructed. i think it is useful to know how many different kind of organizations have endorsed her work. thanks. givechase — Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 02:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The awards section is excessive. It's almost as long as the similar section here: 14th Dalai Lama#Awards and honors. It'd be better to say that she's received dozens of honors for her work and then list a few of the most prominent. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the "awards" are quite minor. I am unsure as to why any of them must be listed unless thay are presented in the corpus of the article for specific reasons. 21:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collect (talk • contribs) 21:23, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

by what criteria do you presume to edit this list? these "awards" are all a matter of record -- which i am currently researching links to. Regardless of how minor they are in your OPINION, they represent the slow and hard work of coalition building, and were not minor to the folks who present them. An honorary phd from the New School Univ is a minor award? Unless you can come up with a rational criteria for qualifying these edits, i think we should allow facts to do the talking, and depend on readers to make the judgement as to what is minor or not. --believe me (talk) 14:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All that is missing is her Sunday School medals <g>. Look, I have a few two dozen certificates which I forget about. I would suggest, in fact, that listing really trivial stuff makes one wonder about all the honors she has. WP is a place to find usable or interesting information -- it is not a repository for trivia. Collect (talk) 14:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could User:Givechase take charge of winnowing down the list? As I said above, the full list here is almost longer than the one for a recent Nobel Peace Prize winner, in whose article we only list the most prominent awards. Include the most significant and just summarize the rest. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to if i could discern some form of regular criteria. looking over other biography pages here on wp, i see a wide range of info, much of it very trivial when it comes to pop stars/actors, etc. (not allowed for people who want to improve society it seems). Am i supposed to use the "Dali Lama Standard" and not exceed his holiness's awards count? who makes the rules here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 15:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

The New York Times reported that un-named sources have claimed Carter takes credit for obtaining funding or for accomplishments when others should share the credit, and also takes credit for uncompleted projects such as the Bronx River Greenway. The same article did not provide any corroborating testimony or evidence to back up such claims. [6] Although not strictly "criticism," the same NY Times article notes that as of December 2008, the primary source of income for Carter's consulting firm is fees for her speaking -- as high as $25,000 per speech. Equally suspicious: The consulting firm employs her husband, among others. [6]

There are several problems with this text. Most fundamentally, criticism sections are now deprecated. See WP:CRITICISM. The preferred arrangement is to fold positivie and critical material into the body of the article, wherever most appropriate. Second, we don't expect secondary sources to cite their sources. We call them "reliable" because we rely on them to be accurate accounts. Third, it's not clear what is suspicious about her speaking fees or the fact that her husband works at the consulting group. I don't see anything in the source about those being suspicious. Finally, this does not appear to be a fair summary of the source. I suggest that it'd be better to delete this section and start over by addng material from the source to relevant parts of the article. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and would further argue that including the last two sentences in a "criticism" section constitutes original research, given that they are not cited as criticism in the source. -- Irn (talk) 12:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

totally agree with all that too--believe me (talk) 23:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made an attempt at covering what is actually in the article (basically one sentence) without making inferences from it. Collect (talk) 21:22, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That looks fine to me. I moved it into the section on her environmental activism. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i don't think this sentence -- "The same article in the Times also stated that her private consulting firm charges $25,000 for some of her speaking appearances and that it employs her husband." should be in the section about the non-profit she used to run since it is current info not associated with that time, and not really all that interesting in general. but if someone wants to stick in somewhere else, go for it.--believe me (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Publications

Environmental justice work is based on science, and her participation in these and other publications is crucial to her work and position in the field - they are distinguishing characteristics. If she were in an actor and these were movies she was in, they would be listed. very few activists have taken the time to actually co-author acedemic peer reviewed papers. --believe me (talk) 16:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if there are no objections, i am going to undo Drawn Some's blanking of the Publications section; as these are important to her work and distinguishing. --believe me (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drawn Some

i have just stumbled on the feature that let's one review edits made by an individual. it seems "Drawn Some" has a real problem with Majora Carter and has gone out of his or her way to remove as much info as possible and minimize her accomplishments at every turn. I would like to move that this character be barred from further vandalizing this page. if anyone can point me in the direction of how to get that done, i will appreciate it. thanks,--believe me (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

James Chase/Givechase/believe me, or whatever your name is, accusing someone of vandalism in the manner in which you have done is a severe violation of several Wikipedia policies. I have certainly done no vandalism. Please refrain from such policy violations in the future.

From your edit history, you seem to be a single purpose account, the very vast majority of your contributions to Wikipedia are related to Majora Carter. Please identify any potential conflicts of interest such as being a friend or associate of the subject of the article, the subject of the article herself, or paid by her or by an organization she is affiliated with for publicity.

From your user discussion page, I see that you have already had your editing privileges suspended in the past for violating Wikipedia policies and blanking this article, etc. Please respect Wikipedia's purpose, guidelines, and spirit! Drawn Some (talk) 10:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article being repeatedly edited by paid publicity person James Chase / Givechase / believe me

James Chase/believe me/Givechase, actually I now see from Googling you that you are the Communications Director for Sustainable South Bronx.Although I do not believe it is absolutely forbidden for you to edit articles like the one on your organization or its employees, it is HIGHLY DISCOURAGED by Wikipedia policy and your contributions should strive to be beyond reproach. I do not think blanking the page is appropriate for a publicist employed by a related organization.Drawn Some (talk) 10:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I am James Chase, and I do monitor Majora Carter references all over the web/traditional press for factual inaccuracies. If Wikipedia was not the fist thing that comes up on a google search of her name, I would not bother with this at all. The "blanking" occured as a result of my own poor familiarity with WP editing procedure, and has not happened since i was thoughtfully enlightened by WP administrators.

HOWEVER, Mr or Ms Drawn Some has repeatedly "blanked" entire sections of Majora Carter page here (awards, publications, B.E.S.T. job training, TV and Radio); pointedly tried to minimize Majora Carter's professional bona-fides on this and other pages (including taking her off of Wesleyan Notable Alumni page when Wesleyan U already gave her a "Distinguished Alumni" honor), and has now attempted to pull apart her non-profit and paid professional life in an arbitrary way that does not reflect her well documented chronology of doing both concurrently.

While her well-documented achievements fall under Drawn Some's consistent attacks, 20 words out of a recent 2500 word NY Times article re: detractors' claims that Carter takes credit for work not solely her own are lovingly preserved.

Look, everything i put on these pages is true and I stake my professional reputation on it. I am hardly the only professional PR person monitoring WP pages. I have modeled all my contributions here on WP based on other WP pages for popular figures with social/ethnic uplift/commercial missions. Please compare before creating a special "standards" for info on Majora Carter.

I still hold that Drawn Some is emotionally biased against Majora Carter and should be barred from editing pages re: her life/work.

Thanks all for taking the time to put up with these childish and unfortunate displays. My apologies and sincere hopes that this can be a valuable tool for those interested in Majora, environmental justice solutions, and hope.--believe me (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out that this situation is even worse than I thought

That James Burling Chase / believe me/ Givingchase is not even employed by Sustainable South Bronx but as VP for Communications and Marketing for the for-profit Majora Carter Group, LLC. http://www.majoracartergroup.com/jamesburlingchasebio

I will suggest that through your edits, vandalism of pages like Majora Carter, Brad Pitt, and Sean Combs, as well as from your comments above, that you are not and cannot be an objective editor of this encyclopedia on subjects such as Majora Carter and Sustainable South Bronx. I will continue to monitor your promotional/marketing/PR efforts on Wikipedia and take any necessary action in requesting administrative intervention to prevent you from subverting the goals of this encyclopedia for your own professional and financial gain. Shame on you. Drawn Some (talk) 03:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah..."Shame on you..." quaint. We don't derive any professional or financial gain from this site - if i added the hours i spend tacking down non-sense like this, i should think that we lose money. Will someone please put this vindictive little DrawnSome to the side??? If nothing else, it would be preferable that Majora Carter be removed form Wikipedia all together. can that be arranged until you all come up with a better system? thanks again.--believe me (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out it is even worse again

James Burling Chase / believe me / Givingchase is MARRIED to Major Carter. As her husband you cannot possibly hope to be objective. Please stop vandalizing Wikipedia for your own personal and financial gain. Drawn Some (talk) 03:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well aren't you the busy little investigator! bravo. --believe me (talk) 03:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

now our busy investigator is altering material from the folks who wrote re: their own movie -- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_of_Water&diff=prev&oldid=260612344

seems DrawnSome is trying to erase Majora's MacArthur Fellowship despite others' best intentions to celebrate it. will someone please take responsibility here.--believe me (talk) 05:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a celebration, nor a PR tool for the publicists for minor public figures. Please review Wikipedia guidelines regarding conflicts of interest and objectivity. You can be banned from editing if the violations continue. Drawn Some (talk) 06:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concentrate on content, not editors

I notice there has been some conflict around editing this article. To me, it seems that both of the editors involved are doing their best to improve this article, so can you please focus on the article's content, rather than continuing to focus on the other editor? Accusing people of vandalism, and in particular, calling for each other to be banned from editing the encyclopedia, is not the way to move forward with improving the article. Somno (talk) 07:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drawn Some, why did you reinstate the information that Carter's company also employs her husband? That sort of thing is quite common, so therefore seems quite insignificant to me and not worth mentioning. Thanks, Somno (talk) 09:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i think this all looks pretty good now; and will appreciate if Drawn Some refrains from hunting Majora's name down on WP, and attempting to make her seem less than she is. cheers all for finding new ways to waste my time.--believe me (talk) 22:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Givechase, please remain civil. Somno (talk) 00:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SSBx Description

her non-profit was always more than simply ajob training ctr - please visit their website. their own mission statement at the org is our best guide here: "environmental justice solutions" http://ssbx.org/mission.html --believe me (talk) 16:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing for you to do, then, would be to find a reliable source that explains SSBx, and use it to fix the article. I haven't checked, but I imagine the article for Sustainable South Bronx should have some sources for you to start with. -- Irn (talk) 17:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life

on of the things that is unique to Majora carter is that she grew up in the South Bronx and achieved so much after starting with so little. On way to illustrate that is to list her Head Start and Public School education - as these schools are listed with NYC DOE and people use free-lunch program stats to gauge economic demographics of a community. I would like to return "Head Start, PS 48, and IS 74. Also, I think it's a little wierd that given all of her accomplishments, that there are 2 lines referring to her marital status in this, when so much other relavent info has been deleted from here ? --believe me (talk) 01:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that Head Start and public school education in the Bronx merit mention because they are indicative of her background. We would certainly mention, for example, if someone was homeschooled. - Jmabel | Talk 04:48, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

commercial links

i notice that someone has removed majoracartergroup.com link at bottom of page. what is the Wikipedia policy on "commercial links" I notice, for instance, that (Tyler Perry with whom Majora appears in HBO's Black List vol 2) has several as yet unmolested "commercial links" - presumably to show interested parties the work for which they are best known. So does Sean Combs. What is the standard? believe me (talk) 01:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that there's anything specifically addressing commercial links. There is the external links guideline, which is probably the most definitive guideline you can find. It specifies, "Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any." As far as I can tell, the website for the Majora Carter Group fits this category. -- Irn (talk) 03:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i have read the guidelines and don't see any reason why Majora's official site cannot be included here. Is there any requirement that edits be vetted on these pages before executing them? i learned that lesson here a few months ago, and would appreciate the same from Ms Drawnsome. thanks--believe me (talk) 23:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody has produced an argument here for deleting the link to Majora Carter's official website, I am returning it to the bottom of the page. It should be noted that majoracartergroup.com is a B2B site and not a consumer products site like one might find on the typical pop star wikipedia page (ie Sean Combs). I respectfully ask that any similarly aggressive edits be accompanied by a full explanation to be posted here with a one week examination period for others to comment/defend/etc. Thank you--believe me (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Personal Life"

the torch relay was activism/protest; personal life would be none of our business really. her career seems to be broken into activism, media and consulting, so i ahve put them together thusly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 02:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That career breakdown seems logical enough and makes sense to me (of course, it could definitely use more fleshing out). Although, as it stands with the Olympic torch bit as a subsection of a subsection, it looks a little clunky in the table of contents. Maybe we could get rid of the subheading and just integrate it into the activism bit? Although I'm not sure how well the Olympic torch bit fits under "Career" either. I would have to disagree, though, about personal life being off-limits. Many BLPs have sections on the subject's personal life because it is relevant to the article, especially if the personal life of the subject has received media attention. We just have to be careful how we do it. -- Irn (talk) 03:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i agree that the torch does not need to be its own section. but because it is a bit of a departure from her previous history of activism, i am bolding the headline.--believe me (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets

Are givechase and believe me both sockpuppets of Majora Carter's husband or are they different people? Inquiring minds want to know. Drawn Some (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i invite you to ask as many questions about me as your busy brain can produce. you may deliver them to me at majoracartergroup.com; the talk page under my account name on wikipedia, or on this discussion page. However, i agree to answer under the condition that you be as open and honest about questions i have re: your pointed needless campaign to diminish Majora Carter's record on these pages. deal? --believe me (talk) 15:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TrueNorth Spot

Why was the mention of the TrueNorth commercial deleted? It is verifiable.[1] Will Beback talk 08:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hi - Drawnsome - givechase/belive me/majora carter's husband here. i am open about how and why i provide truthful and often detailed information about Majora Carter. Like it or not, Wikipedia comes up first on google searches for her; and at the same time, anyone can edit these articles. If i could remove her from these pages all together, believe me, i would.--believe me (talk) 22:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Majora Carter is the first and only environmental justice activist to be featured in a national spot placed in such expensive time slots like the oscars. It was verified as per the protocol here. Why was it deleted ?

--believe me (talk) 22:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody seems to have posted a reason as to why a verifiable entry on a piece of media work done by Majora Carter should be deleted, i am putting it back in. In the future, please post a comment explaining why outright deletions are made before executing. thank you. --believe me (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dec 2008 NY Times Article

this article is 2500 words. what is the rationale for quoting this section above everything else in the article? There are many other much more informative articles about Majora Carter; why is this one given more weight for less info?--believe me (talk) 16:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this question. As far as I can tell, there are two NYT articles that focus on Carter - one from 2008 and one from 2001. The one from 2008 is used throughout her wikipedia article, which makes a lot of sense to me because it addresses a lot of what she's done. What do you mean by "quoting this section above everything else in the article"? What section are you referring to? Also, the 2008 NYT article is used as a reference six times in the wiki article. -- Irn (talk) 01:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Media and consulting

I understand the relevance of these two items to the entire article, but the sections both seem rather lacking in substance, and I’m having difficulty accepting the need for this breakdown when each section has so little information. I don't think "media" needs to be broken down into two further subsections of "radio" and "TV" especially since each one more or less consists of a list of appearances. I think it would be a lot stronger to say that she has made a number of appearances and list some of the most notable ones (all in one sentence) and then focus on more significant accomplishments (like the Promised Land bit, and The Green, maybe? And discuss her role in The Green).

As far as consulting, I don’t know that that needs its own section at the moment. There’s really nothing there besides noting that the Majora Carter Group exists, which can easily be incorporated elsewhere in the article. -- Irn (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I was just breaking it down based on my own experiences of having to spell it out to journalists and others who are confused about how non-profit leader moves into for profit. i get the same basic questions over and over and thought this might make it easier. there are articles from the Kansas City Star and publications in North Carolina re: Majora Carter's consulting that i have not gone into for wikipedia just yet. Happy to have this arranged differently if you think it helps.--believe me (talk) 01:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So I combined it down into one sentence, leaving the parts on The Green and The Promised Land for further expansion/explanation. I didn't touch the consulting section yet. If you could expand it some with those articles, that might be really nice. (Although I must admit, I'm confused how the breakdown explains the transition from non-profit to for-profit; maybe you could explain that more? I guess, what questions, exactly, are you trying to answer that you get asked over and over?) -- Irn (talk) 03:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i have expanded the consulting section and referenced 4 outside sources. i think i have been "neutral". I will appreciate if Drawnsome discusses why they should be deleted before he or she does so this time. if there is any question as to if it is appropriate for a public figures for profit consulting work to show up on WP, i refer to the precedent set here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Giuliani#Giuliani_Partners and ask that an explanation be given as to why one is ok and the other is not before Majora's work is deleted. thanks.--believe me (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

All contributors to and readers of this article need to be aware that one of the major contributors is Majora Carter's husband and paid publicist. Any contributions by her publicist/spouse need to be double-checked for sources and vetted. Also worrisome is the deletion of information from valid public sources that might not be what a publicist wants the public to read. Her husband/publicist has stated on Wikipedia that the only reason he is editing this article is because it is near the top of a Google search for Majora Carter, i.e., his interest in the article is as her publicist and not as an encyclopedist. Also be aware that he is likely using at least two user names. Drawn Some (talk) 19:11, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if you have a specific complaint, make it here. let others review it, and see where it goes. otherwise, go be weird somewhere else please. --believe me (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GiveChase/Bblieve me, you are in violation of Wikipedia's policies on civility with comments like this one as well as baseless accusations of racism and snide comments such as you make on my talk page and above. Such behavior is NOT tolerated on Wikipedia. Please STOP and do NOT repeat it. Please consider this a formal warning. Note that you have also been warned above about remaining civil by user Somno. You have been very uncivil at least 4 or 5 times at this point and I urge you not to continue down this path. Drawn Some (talk) 05:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Circular" publicity

In regards to conflict of interest, it is a serious problem to have a publicist/spouse feeding information to the media and then using those same articles as reference to create a publicity tool on Wikipedia. Drawn Some (talk) 05:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if you want to call me a liar, do so; then prove it. otherwise, put a lid on your anger please--believe me (talk) 12:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Majora Carter Media Removal

here we go again. how many times must you be told not to arbitrarily remove sourced material that is relevant to the professional life of a person communicating environmental justice concerns to the widest possible audience. The piece you removed has done a lot for changing the popular image of the South Bronx and has been written about all over as a result.

this is the second time Drawnsome has done this -- see above.

PLEASE PUT YOUR CONCERNS OUT FOR DISCUSSION BEFORE REMOVING SOURCED MATERIAL. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE AN AXE TO GRIND HERE. PLEASE GRIND IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.--believe me (talk) 12:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drawnsome

this character has now taken to littering the article with as many little tags about irrelevance and spam and so on. Can someone please prevent Drawnsome from wasting his/her and my time please?--believe me (talk) 12:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your talk page for a formal warning regarding your continuing personal attacks and libel and a caution against continued editing of this article. Thank you. Drawn Some (talk) 22:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

at this point, it's really you who should be posting your proposed deletions of sourced material and seeing if anyone agrees or disagrees before going aheead. I am playing it by the rules son, such that there are any here. based on what other editors have referred me to here, you are not. i am not paid for this, by the way. --believe me (talk) 00:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please stop removing sourced content without discussion. The Coca Cola company did select Majora as an "environmental Champion" Torch Runner along with others representing the 5 continents. This is a part of the record. What criteria did you use to justify removing it? Why can't you allow an open discussion before you try to limit information?--believe me (talk) 04:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag

I returned the COI tag until the situation with the COI is resolved. Drawn Some (talk) 13:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. The conflict of interest tag is only applicable when the edits were recently made and nobody has had a chance to review them yet, or when there is clearly non-neutral wording in the article that will take time to fix (see wp:aww). Neither is the case here. I see no inherent lack of neutrality in the prose or text of the article. Please consider the wp:coi issue, in so far as the current state of the article is concerned, resolved (unless you have specific wording you have concerns with, in which case you should feel free to reword as appropriate). Of course, going forward, it is always my recommendation that anyone with a direct conflict of interest make suggested edits on an article's talk page and allow other Wikipedia editors to implement said edits. user:j (aka justen) 23:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks, I cleaned up the article so it's not needed. I have fortunately not been involved with a case of COI that could not be resolved with a db-spam tag and so was not familiar with the COI tag. Drawn Some (talk) 06:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions of New York police officer and firefighter?

As much as I respect the role they play in society, I don't think the opinions of these two people are important enough to mention in this article. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They were fellow torch-bearers from NYC, not just passsers-by. Coca Cola also issued a statement condemning her actions and the negative reactions were widely reported in the press. It is important to give a balanced view. Carter's publicist/spouse believe me/Givechase thinks it important to mention Coca Cola so perhaps the statement by their spokesperson should also be included. Drawn Some (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They have a right to their opinions. However most Americans think that protesting against China's human rights violations in Tibet is a good thing. BTW in case you were wondering I don't support the Tibetan independence movement since I think that would only lead to more violence and suffering. Anyway, to get back to the question, I don't see why these two people's opinions should be quoted in the article. The fact of them being New York City police and fire people does not make their opinions more important. Steve Dufour (talk) 19:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "give a balanced view"? We're trying to achieve a neutral point of view; this is not necessarily the same thing as a balanced view. When trying to balance, it’s easy to give undue weight to certain viewpoints. In this case, adding criticism as "balance" without including support is rather disingenuous as it actually makes the section unbalanced. However, in terms of maintaining NPOV, it doesn’t make sense to "balance" the "view" of Carter’s actions. The most neutral way to present it would be to simply present her act as is without the opinions of others – supporters, detractors, whatever.

You cite "balance" as your motive and then you take a gratuitous jab at givechase. What exactly are you trying to balance? -- Irn (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Yes, neutral point of view. Please forgive me for using the word "balanced", I sometimes use a similar word for the one I intend in error. A few points:

First of all, the opinions of Wikipedia editors on Majora Carter, Tibet, or Carter's actions as torch-bearer are irrelevant and have no place here.

Secondly, the opinions of the fellow-torchbearers related to Tibet are irrelevant, only their opinions related to Carter's action as Olympic torchbearer are relevant and were reported in the media. This article is about Carter, not Tibet. The reaction to Carter's action is verifiable by reliable sources and most certainly has a place in the article.

As far as undue weight, I know of no polls regarding thoughts of the world population about Tibet, about using the Olympics as a venue for political or religious expression, or about Carter's actions as torch-bearer. If I had to guess I would say a majority of people in the world support Tibet but that a majority would also believe that the Olympics are not a venue for politics and religious views.

For the most part, NYC newspapers are fairly liberal and when they state in an article with which Carter cooperated that she gave the same speech twice in one day and cried at the same point in each speech, or that she violated a signed agreement when she displayed a flag as a torch-bearer and that she was criticized by the sponsor as well as by her fellow torch-bearers, that information is important.

We don't write articles here at Wikipedia and deliberately leave out important information. We list her valid referenced awards, which are positive recognition, and we also provide valid, referenced negative recognition of her. The reader is left to form his own impression. I think if you review WP:NPOV you will see that the article adheres to the letter and spirit of the guidelines. Incidentally, this is also why we have guidelines such as WP:COI, to prevent people with a COI from creating a puff piece or libelous article.

The whole discussion of the torchbearer event has been deleted by a couple of different editors, and I may have been one of them. Irn, you and Carter's husband/publicist believe me/Givechase and possibly others insisted that it be returned despite the fact that Carter had never before and has never since publicly advocated on behalf of Tibet, or at least not that I can find in reliable sources. Her Tibet activism, except for that one "Trojan horse ploy", as it was described in the media, is not an important part of this biographical encyclopedia entry. There seemed to be some thought that since it had received extensive media coverage that it should be included. The media coverage, at least that in reliable sources, gave extensive reporting of the negative reaction to her actions. You can't halfway include something picking only the flattering parts, you MUST maintain NPOV.

Also, I don't see where I have made a "gratuitous jab" at anyone by making a reference to including something that has already been discussed and even inserted in the article. Again, if the article she was chosen by Coca Cola as an honor, it also needs to be said that they disavowed her actions and did not approve of her using the ceremony to express political views. I would appreciate it, Irn, if you would remain Civil and refrain from personal attacks.

Irn, I don't suspect that you have a conflict of interest but obviously you have very strong feelings about certain subjects and we must all strive to remain neutral and civil. I was very much concerned when you seemed to advocate for believe me/Givechase who has repeatedly indulged his very strong double conflict of interest to the detriment not only of this article but other articles and compromised the integrity of this project. I would never dream of editing my biographical article nor of allowing my spouse or publicist to do so.

Incidentally, I must admit that I have wondered if Carter knows what her husband is up to and if she approves of it or if she understands that he is injuring not only his reputation but also hers but that is really irrelevant. Thank you. Drawn Some (talk) 02:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drawnsome, i have posted a new head shot of Majora for you to review. Majora_2008_grey_suit_copy.jpg

Again , it's really sweet of you to be worried about our reputations, but we'll do just fine if you never think of us again, and find something new to obsess about.--believe me (talk) 03:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You did not answer the question of what you are trying to balance or how including the opinions of a firefighter and police officer constitutes NPOV. On their own, the opinions of these two individuals are totally insignificant. The people themselves are nowhere near notable, and why should we care about what they have to say?

Your argument seems to be that reliable sources reported that there was a negative reaction to her action and that we should, therefore include that reaction in the article. I can agree with that. However, the two men named? Not notable. The fact that one of those men was honoring firefighters who died on September 11? Absolutely irrelevant. The corporation that sponsored her officially distancing itself from her action? That strikes me as significantly more notable and relevant.

As for the "gratuitous jab". In the sentence referenced (Carter's publicist/spouse believe me/Givechase thinks it important to mention Coca Cola so perhaps the statement by their spokesperson should also be included), it was not necessary to mention givechase at all, much less his connection to the article. Further, I never saw him say that he thinks it important to mention Coca Cola, but rather he just wanted to see it included that she was chosen by Coca Cola (the difference is small but significant). Moreover, you were trying to use his previous comments – with which you disagreed – against him. A much better way to make the same point without taking a gratuitous jab at another user could have been as you did in your following comment, noting that if the article includes it as an honor, the flip side of that should also be included – no reason to mention what givechase thinks is important or his relationship to Majora Carter. -- Irn (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why is the firfighter's non-olympic related reason (9.11) to carry the torch important here, and not Majora's being selected as part of Coca cola's environmental champions program not included?

Nat Acad of Science is consulting work, not an honor or award

re Giuliann-, is that the WP criteria - only more famous people get to list professional affiliations?

that $25k price tag on the speaking fee looks like an advirtisement, who let that slip through the COI filter?

it is more telling to know who one chooses to surround themselves with in an on-going professional relationship (Peabody Winners) than the details on a fireman with whome she did not 'choose' and was only very briefly involved. A Peabody Winning producer vs a podcaster that nobody has ever recognized is an important difference.

what is the filter for determining which awards are more noteworthy than another? There are some pretty minor ones up here now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.144.139 (talk) 21:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Changes to Consulting and Awards 4/20/2009

the NYTimes article from DEC 2008 and a Businessweek magazine article both report on MC Group, LLC's first consulting clients in N. Carolina's Elizabth City State U and the rural counties surrounding. This is a big departure but important progression in her career. Rudy Giulianni is another public figure who has taken his name to move into for profit relationships based on past success. I see that there is an entire section in his WP devoted to this with links to his company, and think that it is a valuable addition here as well.

Giulianni is much more famous as he has been Mayor of NYC during 9/11 and made a credible campaign for the Republican nomination for candidate for President of the United States and the length of his Wikipedia article is approximately 8-10 times as long as the one on your wife and has more detail and appropriately so.Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

which is more important re: her consulting firm: that it employs her husband and brings in 25k speaking fees, or who the clients are? both can be included here, but why was one deleted over the other given the example above?

A list of clients of your wife's consulting firm is significant in her publicity materials but not to this article. Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, Majora Carter's Nat'l Acad of Sci post is a year long advisory role with bi-monthly meetings which are consulting activities, but it's currently listed under AWARDS, which it clearly is not. i propose that it should also be included in CONSULTING, with a brief description of the NAS aims for the project.

I changed the title of the section to awards & honors.Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the consulting company is described as "private" twice in the same paragraph. i think once is enough.

I do agree, thanks for pointing this out.Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: AWARDS, i understand there is WP style culture that discourages long lists for some reason. To avoid elevating any of the 40 or so awards over one another where it is difficult to determine the "most important", I suggest: Majora Carter has won dozens of awards, most notably a 2006 MacArthur "genius" Fellowship based on the dollar amount.

No, it is appropriate to list a few of her most important awards. I have corrected an error in one. The dollar amount of an award is unimportant. All of the 25 MacArthur awards given that year were for the same amount. I cannot imagine why you would wish to include the dollar amount of this award but not others such as the Union Square award nor are your reasons for wanting to delete all of her awards now after adding a list of 44 earlier transparent.Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

there is a page on majoracartergroup.com with a running list of her awards that the section can reference to give interested readers a place to go without taking column space here.--believe me (talk) 17:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, the Wikipedia Article stands alone. It is not a publicity device and it does not incorporate references to your wife's website for the purpose of saving space. Important, relevant, verifiable information will be listed here. You are free to put whatever you want on your website.

I have responded here to each of your points although I cannot promise to do so in the future. We are all volunteers here and I have already put much more effort into this article than is warranted. I would suggest that you not try to micromanage this article considering your history and that you restrict yourself to pointing out unverifiable libelous information. Thank you. Drawn Some (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, nobody has asked you to respond to each of these points. It is hoped that other people will share their opinions. I apologize if this is in conflict with your self-aggrandized sense of authority over this article. If by "micro-managing" you mean offering points here for discussion, you may want to consider a new hobby. I have never insinuated "libel" here, just advocated for a broader picture with which others can learn.--believe me (talk) 14:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Changes to MEDIA 4/20/2009

Radio - the Producer of The Promised Land, Marge Ostroushko, is a Peabody Award winner. This is an important aspect as it relates to who Majora Carter surrounds herself with. It has been deleted for some reason, but exists in earlier versions of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Givechase (talk • contribs) 23:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Demonstrating "who Majora Carter surrounds herself with" is NOT a purpose of this article, that is your job as VP Marketing and Communications for her, but you may not use Wikipedia as a tool for your public relations efforts. I have simplified the mention of Ms. Ostroushko but left her name in. Drawn Some (talk) 01:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Green the Ghetto

this is the title of most of her public talks over the past 4 years, and she holds several trademark usages on the phrase. thanks.--believe me (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we could elaborate in the infobox that she is known for "advocating for environmental revitalization in ghetto neighborhoods"? Or something to that effect? See also my comment on your talk page, GiveChase.--The lorax (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Federal Government Interaction

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1249064551158.shtm http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/CommitteeView.aspx?key=49008 http://www.team-psa.com/2009nephc/main.asp http://member.clintonglobalinitiative.org/Page.aspx?pid=3086 http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/googlesearch.asp?cx=015330350109166927892%3Ayeaxxmus-ca&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=majora+carter&sa=Search#420

--believe me (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Majora Carter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Majora Carter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121015181251/http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/04/10/2008-04-10_south_bronx_woman_pulls_flag_from_sleeve.html to http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/04/10/2008-04-10_south_bronx_woman_pulls_flag_from_sleeve.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Majora Carter. 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) 20:34, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Majora Carter. 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) 09:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Majora Carter. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140521031949/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121001/hunts-point/freshdirect-hires-majora-carter-round-up-local-support-for-bronx-move to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121001/hunts-point/freshdirect-hires-majora-carter-round-up-local-support-for-bronx-move

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) 05:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Majora Carter. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225122400/http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.1076861/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id=%7BDD826DBF-DAE6-4730-A35C-8AA6FF8AF3DE%7D&notoc=1 to http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.1076861/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id=%7BDD826DBF-DAE6-4730-A35C-8AA6FF8AF3DE%7D&notoc=1

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) 16:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]