Talk:George Pruteanu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Hi. Before putting the dispute tag and removing affirmations from the article, please say why. If you think that the article is incomplete and therefore skewed against Mr. Pruteanu, you are welcomed to add more information about himself and his work.

But please do not remove information unless you know it's wrong. His older problems with the law are well known (being published in many important Romanian newspapers) and AFAIK are not denied or disputed by Mr. Pruteanu. Meitner 15:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

My reply. Hi Meitner. The dispute tag was put there for exactly this reason, the information contained in the article were, well, disputed. I don’t want to start an argument with you, I like Wikipedia and, if I can, I want to contribute to it, but isn’t it a little funny that you question the reason for my tag but not at all the information you “know” so well that are true? I wonder how much you know about the Romanian newspapers in fact; for this, indulge me for a moment, you have to take some information with a grain of salt. What country are you from, if I may ask? Drdox

Wikipedia has a policy about not doing any "original research" and as such, it has to rely on other sources for getting its information. As I am not aware of Mr. Pruteanu suing the article writers or even protesting against these articles and that's why I assumed they were correct. If you know some published source which says otherwise, please bring it in here. Meitner 17:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)