Talk:Fred Reichheld

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Ohio Portal Fred Reichheld is part of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as b-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
B	rated as b-Class on the assessment scale
Mid	rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale

[edit] External link to blog post

Fairsing has removed the external link to an article that details the merits and potential drawbacks of the NPS model. Before removing this link as "spam", please discuss here. Perhaps we can get a vote together for consensus, as well as on the NPS page. Thekohser 17:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I assume good motives here -- Thekosher no doubt believes that the link to his Blog posting on the topic is relevant and helpful to Wikipedia readers. But it is in general violation of Wikipedia policy: See: Wikipedia:External links#Links to normally avoid, particularly points number 11 (no linking to a site you yourself maintain), 12 (generally avoid linking to Blogs), and the following paragraph. As stated there: "a primary policy of Wikipedia is that no one from a particular site/organization should post links to that organization/site" to promote neutrality. If you believe your Blog post is particularly relevant to the topic, good Wikipedia practice is to open a discussion on the talk page of the article and allow other Wikipedians to make that determination. So when I saw the link added by the Wikipedian who runs the blog, I removed it as it violates that Wikipedia policy. I believe that doing so was a proper action.

What I did poorly, however, was refer to the link as "link spam," in my edit summary. "Link spam" is a technically not the most proper label here because link spam in the conventional sense is usually added to WP by a bot, not an individual. A better (although perhaps overly lengthy) edit summary would have been: "Remove link to blog in violation of WP policy because it was added by the editor who maintains the blog."

In any case, if other Wikipedians feel strongly that the blog posting is especially relevant and useful (despite the general guideline that links to blogs should be avoided), they can add back the link. As it stands, I will again remove the link and politely request that the blog author refrain from adding it back again himself. For the record, if a discussion about the actual usefulness of linking to this blog post does occur, I will recuse myself from that discussion and accept community consensus to avoid the appearance of bias given that my original edit was reverted. Fairsing 20:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You, Sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. I concur with your thorough assessment, and I will abide by the removal of said link. If anyone else starts a "consensus vote" on the matter, I too will recuse myself. ==> Thekohser 21:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I have edited the above comment to remove the external link. We've given Gregory Kohs enough free advertising. --Gmaxwell 04:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)