Talk:Dennis T. Avery

German links considered BLP violations?

MN removed a German link because being in German it was a BLP vio [1]. Or something; I'm really not sure what his rationale was William M. Connolley (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

And again; with "rv blp exemption claimed, blp states contentious material should be removed on sight, if the ref`s can`t be read then there is no way to verify the claims)". This claim seems dubious to me: *you* can't read them, but people who read German can William M. Connolley (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Then that ref belongs on the german wp not the english one, blp says any contentious material which can`t be verified should be removed mark nutley (talk) 14:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Um, yes. But *can't be verified* means "in principle" not "by you". Just because you can't read something is irrelevant William M. Connolley (talk) 14:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

English WP = English readers, go figure mark nutley (talk) 14:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Slow down, both of you, and stay in one place, please. Mark, you are wrong. Read WP:NONENG. However, the German source did not support the claim in the first place, so the article is better now. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Stephan, with regards to wp:noneng it says "When quoting a source in a different language, provide both the original-language quotation and an English translation, in the text or in a footnote". As this was not done ca nyou tell me if i was correct in removing the source under blp? mark nutley (talk) 14:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

No, you were not. Nobody was quoting anything. Quotes are used fairly rarely on Wikipedia. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok given it is a BLP and noneng also says this When citing a source in a different language, without quotations, the original and its translation should be provided if requested by other editors: this can be added to a footnote, or to the talk page if too long for a footnote is it not better to remove said contentious material until a translation is provided? mark nutley (talk) 15:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

You are thrashing around for excuses now. Did you or any other editor request a translation? And how was the material contentious? No-one complained about the material - you complained about the language of the source. Finally, posting translations is only plausible if there are small snippets that can be used under fair use, or if the source is not under copyright. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope i`m not trashing around at all, According to critics he is the source of a claim that organic food is more dangerous to eat than food produced using chemical pesticides because of usage of animal manure in organic farming That is a contentious claim, and requires solid sourcing. There were none for it. BLP is quite clear in this, removing the content until either another source was found or a translation was made available was the right call mark nutley (talk) 15:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

No. To repeat myself: "Did you or any other editor request a translation?" --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Never got the chance, removed it, had some work to do then all this was waiting when i got back. mark nutley (talk) 15:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

So. You removed it for the wrong reason. You got lucky in that the result (in my opinion) was ok, but that was mere coincidence. In fact, the removal violated not only WP:NONENG, but also WP:AGF - if in doubt, assume the editor who added the source carefully checked it. Note that the same holds for off-line sources. I wouldn't be surprised if more people here can read German than have access to a good research library, especially given that Google Translate has reached quite a good level of accuracy. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk: Dennis T. Avery. Why the use of was, did and believed when writing about Avery? I believe he is alive and well. His employer, Hudson Institute, shows him to be living: http://www.hudson.org/experts/19-dennis-t-avery. As of today, the Hudson Institute's website features an obituary of Amy A. Kass, who died yesterday, Aug. 19, 2015. I believe the problem arose from a confusion with Dennis S. Avery. See "Dennis T. Avery: I'm not dead" at http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2012/jul/30/dennis-t-avery-im-not-dead. I suspect that someone deleted his death information but forgot to change the verbs. Professionaleducator (talk) 01:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dennis T. Avery. 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 https://web.archive.org/20081202122204/http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st279/st279a.html to http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st279/st279a.html

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 05:11, 22 January 2016 (UTC)