Talk:Stew Albert

	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).

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Merger

While looking for an article about Stew Albert today, I discovered that there are two! While Stewart Albert was his formal name, he was practically universally known as Stew. (His autobiography is titled Who the Hell is Stew Albert?) Therefore I propose merging the two articles and keeping them under this name. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 00:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to wait. This is an obvious case of two articles about the same person. I say, go ahead and merge. Wikidemo 21:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I am deleting the picture because it is celebrating the subject and there is not enough information given by the uploader to demonstrate its provenance. 129.71.73.248 23:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I respect the fact that it celebrates the subject, but its provenance? It was provided by Albert's widow, who is the author of the image, for use in his article. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 00:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can that possibly be verified, though? I understand that there are labyrinthine rules pertaining to the uploading and usage of images, but the user in question solely made edits regarding this topic and picture and all we have to go on is the fact that this anonymous person says it is so. 129.71.73.248 00:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll e-mail Judy Gumbo and ask her to verify it. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 00:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you know her? Did you get a reply already? I would oppose it on the other previously stated grounds, but I am fine with the excised pic/thumbnail for biographical purposes. 129.71.73.248 01:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know her, but her e-mail address is available at her website and Stew Albert's. I also prefer the cropped picture, but I'll check that we have her permission to use the image, otherwise I'll delete it. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 01:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stew Albert. 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/20070830143137/http://www.counterpunch.org/albert12222005.html to http://www.counterpunch.org/albert12222005.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) 11:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ABOUTSELF

ABOUTSELF specifically says that material written by the subject is a reliable source. This removal is disruptive and tendentious. nableezy - 20:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABOUTSELF does not apply as the material was not in fact self-published, but was published by CounterPunch via editorial control. This has been detailed at length during the present RFC discussion.

The broader problem is that this is a very low-quality article with almost no sourcing. If all we have is a deprecated self-source, we barely have the material for an article - David Gerard (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ABOUTSELF does not say only self-published sources, it says Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves. Kindly dont misrepresent policy. nableezy - 21:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That means the questionable publications talking about themselves, not people writing in the questionable publications. Even your supporters in the RFC are correcting themselves on this one.

More broadly, you're approaching policy in looking-for-loopholes mode, and you think you've found one. This isn't one, though - David Gerard (talk) 22:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And this is a supposedly questionable source writing about himself. More broadly, you are ignoring policy, and the deprecation page itself. Will deal with the user conduct part of this elsewhere eventually. nableezy - 23:08, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]