User talk:Neiondeion

You might want to read...

Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view. Running around inserting accusations into articles (without sources) is in clear violation of one of our core tenets. -- Merope 20:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CNBC

The fact that these people have not had jobs on Wall Street is fact, not opinion.

But it makes the implication that they should have. Specifically when you say:

The CNBC news channel has been criticized for hiring anchors who have little or no Wall Street experience.

Criticized by whom? To make this an includable fact, it would at the very least have to be properly attributed. In addition to, as mentionned above, the neutrality requirement. At which point it could go in the CNBC article. This article spin-off will still have to be deleted, much as I do like the title. Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 21:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being neutral

Hello, Neiondeion. I noticed a couple of edits you made to NBC anchors' articles (e.g. Dylan Ratigan, David Faber), pointing out that while they are news presenters on financial subjects, that they have not held positions of note in financial institutions. While this point may be valid, according to Wikipedia's policies on Biographies of Living Persons, the encyclopedia article about a person cannot contain original accusations or judgement. The article can document controversy if it has been talked about by a reliable source, but it's important to remember that Wikipedia's only purpose is to neutrally document verifiable information about subjects, and never to accuse or make value judgements about these subjects. --HassourZain 21:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]