Talk:Mitchell S. Steir

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 December 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

RyLaughlin (talk · contribs) / Mitchell S. Steir This user has contributed to the article.

Recent edits

Hi all,

I've made two edits that I believe answer the criticism about the article and I would appreciate a second review when possible. Thanks everyone.

RyLaughlin (talk) 16:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and COI

At least some of the sources are just industry inside WP:NOT#NEWS. The notability is in question. The editor User:RyLaughlin has a COI. Widefox; talk 15:06, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this article is an established thought leader in his industry. He's been the subject of many articles written in prominent publications. I do not believe the subject falls under the WP:NOT#NEWS category. I'd like to dispute that notability is an issue. RyLaughlin (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request edit on 9 September 2013

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

Would somebody be so kind to please replace any content in this article that may be perceived as an advertisement with language that adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines? RyLaughlin (talk) 16:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. Sorry, you need to be more specific than that. However, you have my permission to edit the following sentences, which seem far from neutral to me:

"Steir has since become known as one of the most prolific producers in the country and one of the top brokers in the city with longevity and a track record of success." - subjective, needs to be backed up by facts rather than phrases like "most prolific".
"At the time of the transaction, Steir was the company’s top-producing broker and along with new Studley president Michael D. Colacino was known to be one half of New York City's most prolific leasing teams." - same as the previous one, needs to be backed up with facts.

When he is referred to by an author as "prolific", how should I be writing this on Wikipedia. These aren't my words, they are the authors.

"Steir is helping guide Time Warner as it scours the city for 3.5 million square feet of office space" - "scours the city" is too evocative; we need facts instead of words like this

You might also want to check out the words to watch for more pointers. Hope this helps. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:17, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your permission, I will be sure to work within the guidelines provided RyLaughlin (talk) 15:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Except that there are also other problems here in addition to the obvious conflict of interest. The whole article is riddled with copyvios as well. An example: Real Estate Forum, September 2011 has this text:

WilmerHale relocation in 2011 to 7 World Trade Center earlier this year that included a "green" clause, reportedly the first lease to use language devised by New York City's Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability

while our article has

WilmerHale's relocation in 2011 to 7 World Trade Center that included a "green" clause, which is reportedly the first lease to use language devised by New York City's Office of Long-Term Sustainability

A good deal of the promotional horse-manure that Mr. Stradivarius (talk · contribs) rightly draws attention to above seems to be copied directly from the sources. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to paraphrase these sources and will gladly fix them if the Investigation of potential copyright issue is lifted. I was not very aware of many of Wikipedia's nuances while writing this and other articles and I would appreciate the opportunity to clean up all of the promotional sounding language.RyLaughlin (talk) 19:23, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a Mitchell S. Steir/Temp page. Somebody please review and replace the old content with the new. Thank you. RyLaughlin (talk) 22:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. A reviewer felt that this edit would not improve the article.

Please somebody review Mitchell S. Steir/Temp and if appropriate move to Mitchell S. Steir RyLaughlin (talk) 20:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. That would usually have been an appropriate way of dealing with your previous copyvios, but not really in this case since you also have a conflict of interest here. I've cleaned the article (see below), and removed some of the WP:Puffery at the same time. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.reforum-digital.com/reforum/201109?pg=115#pg115; http://nypost.com/2002/06/07/studley-broker-buyout-founder-approached-with-multi-million-offer/; http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/realestate/01sqft.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1383933746-rAhXq2iCGB9tKjtPbo4/CA. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Is this subject noteworthy?

Please comment whether the subject of this page meets Wikipedia:Notability guidelines and if you believe the template should be removed from this page. RyLaughlin (talk) 15:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sources are not independent or make only passing mention, or are interviews. There is some coverage, though, and to be sure you could always add some of these:

This might be better dealt with through an AfD instead of a RfC. --I dream of horses (T) @ 00:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with I dream of horses see WP:AfD if you have an issue with the notability of this article.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 00:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since both I dream of horses and Comatmebro suggest that this would be better discussed at AfD, I've gone ahead and listed it there: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitchell S. Steir. I don't myself have any strong feeling one way or the other, he's a property dealer who has done some property deals, which is what property dealers do. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:22, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchell Steir

Who a subject's wife is relevant to a biography (in fact nearly every biography includes such data so i am not sure what you are talking about). I added his birthday with a valid source (which you removed). I added that he is a member of AIPAC (which you removed). I provided a source that he has two children (which you removed). I added that his grandfather was a rabinnacal scholar which you also removed (in fact he was Joseph Shalom Shubow). Anyhow, so your claim is that my edits were solely about his wife?? Anyhow, his wife even has her own wikipage Nancy Ganz Patapsco913 (talk) 13:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mitchell S. Steir. 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/20110514103447/http://www.mcny.org/visit-the-museum/about.html to http://www.mcny.org/visit-the-museum/about.html

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) 19:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]