Talk:Simon Dallow

message: I dont understand why what im including is inappropriately unbalanced. His was a major mistake and thus readers should be able to be informed of it. Sure he has performed his job in other aspects thats why he has that job and readers would know that, they may not know of this incident for example until they read this entry. By saying its unbalanced because there is not a lot of material included which states he has performed his job as expected by its description would mean that all articles on people a full of trite to balance a major event such as this ,which made the Herald for instance.I cant find other referenced material with a NPOV which states he has done his job outstandingly in contrast. I dont consider it correct that wikipedia expects to only write of significant events in individuals careers if you can find enough material of low importance to seem to contrast it even though that material may not exist.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oystergannet (talk • contribs) 05:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Image:SimonDallow.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SimonDallow.JPG

message: The stuff about the stock-market crash etc. sounds very like TVNZ's profile of him.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tshiels1 (talk • contribs) 08:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy from TVNZ?

message: I dont understand why what im including is inappropriately unbalanced. His was a major mistake and thus readers should be able to be informed of it. Sure he has performed his job in other aspects thats why he has that job and readers would know that, they may not know of this incident for example until they read this entry. By saying its unbalanced because there is not a lot of material included which states he has performed his job as expected by its description would mean that all articles on people a full of trite to balance a major event such as this ,which made the Herald for instance.I cant find other referenced material with a NPOV which states he has done his job outstandingly in contrast. I dont consider it correct that wikipedia expects to only write of significant events in individuals careers if you can find enough material of low importance to seem to contrast it even though that material may not exist.Oystergannet (talk) 05:23, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As it says at the top of the page, this article falls under WP:BLP, which has "must adhere strictly to NPOV". Highlighting a gaffe in such a short article is against BLP, whether it was your intention or not it looks disparaging. If you want to write about him I'm sure there's a number of notable events he's covered, and there's nothing on his career history. XLerate (talk) 06:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

text: You edit didn't adhere to the WP:NPOV policy, which excludes "something lovely" as well. It's untrue to say there's nothing else - he went to Christchurch to cover the 2010 Canterbury earthquake for example. The NZ Herald has about 211 articles, Stuff 46. XLerate (talk) 07:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

text: 257 articles from those two sources, picking just one which didn't go well is never going to be a balanced representation. It's not the most significant event in his career, that's your opinion. XLerate (talk) 01:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I've edited your comment above to remove a BLP violation. He's not beyond criticism but you want to add only criticism and that's the issue. If you want to write about his career then do so, strictly adhering to NPOV. XLerate (talk) 06:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

text: No that is a wrong assumption. If you want to write a balanced section on his career then you will need to do your own research. How many of the 257 articles have you checked so far? XLerate (talk) 08:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Look further up this discussion, 07:53, 1 October 2010. XLerate (talk) 06:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous Broadcasting