User talk:Shritwod

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Shritwod, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Signature icon.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! DuncanHill 18:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

[edit] Vandal reporting

You have twice reported User:TruthSelfEvident to WP:AN/V. However, these edits do not meet a strict interpretation of WP:VANDAL. Furthermore, the user was not even warned today. The user is using edit summaries, and does not appear to be trying to purposely hurt the encyclopedia, so this seems like a content dispute. Please use the article talk page to discuss your concerns, and I'll tell TruthSelfEvident the same thing.-Andrew c [talk] 21:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi

I userfied the contents of the article at User:Shritwod/Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi (draft) per this request. -- Jreferee t/c 21:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Shritwod. I received a message from SaltyDawg regarding User:Shritwod/Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi (draft). The draft still is highly POV. The lead paragraph starts out misusing the alternate names for the article to indict El-Difrawi through "also know as" innuendo, then label's him "controversial", and then calls his model scouting company a scam without any conclusion by a court of the same - all within the first sentence! Even the Adolf Hitler article does not do that. The third sentence in the lead paragraph lists an unproven accusation and then, zamo, right into a criminal conviction. The article then goes into his criminal history instead of his biographical history, establishes a guilt by association to accused pedophiler Lou Pearlman, then goes into detail about El-Difrawi current activities, implying that everyone needs to watch out for these current activities because El-Difrawi is a bad guy. The draft article isn't a biography. It seems more of a hit piece on El-Difrawi. You've had two months to attempt to get this draft article into shape and I don't think it is there. El-Difrawi might be everything the draft article is saying he his, but the draft article is not written in a neutral, encyclopedic way. If you believe it is, you still can follow the instructions at Steps to list a new deletion review and post a request for the article to be restored using this draft as its contents. -- Jreferee t/c 16:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I think the word "controversial" is very NPOV for this person. I don't think controversial is as bad a word as you make it out to be - many people are not controversioal. The lists of aliases is neutral and appropriate and cited. It merely states other names this person is known as and nothing about those names being used as part of any fraud. The modeling company was labeled a scam by the New York State Consumer Protection Agency which is herein cited. Scam is not a legal term so no court could ever label the operation a scam, but a government agency looking out for consumer protection can. The accusation is clearly labelled as an accusation, and is prominent in the news since it was recently covered by local news and the Washington Post, also herein cited. Then, the subject's bigraphical information is covered. However, there are few secondary sources writing biographies of defrawy so this information is necessarily limited. His crminal history is extremely relevant because it plays into everything he has done here and is well established by multiple sources. Lou Peralman is neither a known nor convicted Pedophile, and nowhere in this article is this mentioned. Lou Pearlman was accused of pedophilia in Vanity Fair and other publications, but this article makes absolutely zero mention and there is absolutely zero attempt at guilt by association. This section is also has the label "Association with Lou Pearlman and Modeling Business" not "modeling scam". As the largest modeling scam in the history of the United States (and this is not exaggeration) this business is handled very NPOV. According to independent citation, El-Difrawi is currently operating one of the largest and most successful phishing operations in the world. If you INFER that you should stay away from that then that is on you, it is nowehere implied here. Further, invoking Hitler is just taking an extreme position, it has zero bearing on this discussion. The two topics are not the same, the biographical information available is not the same. If you can point to a Wikipedia guidline that states the the bio for Hitler is the template for bioraphis of living persons I'll buy it, otherwise I believe his invocation logically weakens your argument against inclusion. AGAIN: the original reason for deletion was non-notability, notability has been established. This person is a career criminal and scammer (although this article never states that) the entry is very NPOV in light of the majority of this person's activities.--SaltyDawg (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.. Jreferee, I think you're right about some of the more recent edits. It needs a more neutral POV to open with. I certainly can't find proof about many of those aliases either. Shritwod (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, just curious why you requested having this page deleted. It seemed like the page was startin to shape up. --Salty Dawg t/c 19:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)