Talk:Milbank

message: "the first lawyer in the United States found guilty of executing a false Bankruptcy Rule 2014 affidavit."  why is nonsense like this worthy of any encyclopedia?  it seems WP:WEIGHT WP:SOAP WP:no scandal mongering.     —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.209.76 (talk) 02:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  and notability.  removed accordingly. Antisoapbox (talk) 16:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  also note that this section of the article originated with an edit from Knowsetfree who has repeatedly edited this and other articles to prominently highlight a few select news items from the many thousands about the subject of the article.  Repeatedly other editors, with varying degrees of politeness and patience, have corrected this and pointed out to Knowsetfree that such edits violate WP:NPOV among others.   The wiki policies applicable to Knowsetfree's edits are: 
"Wikipedia aims to present competing views in proportion to their representation in reliable sources on the subject" WP:WEIGHT
"Just as giving undue weight to a viewpoint is not neutral, so is giving undue weight to other verifiable and sourced statements. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements."  WP:WEIGHT
"in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors" WP:WEIGHT Antisoapbox 
"Many things are in the news and are reported by numerous reliable and verifiable sources that are independent of the subject, yet are not of historic or encyclopedic importance."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:News_articles
"Even where a topic is presented in terms of facts rather than opinions, inappropriate tone can be introduced through the way in which facts are selected, presented, or organized."  WP:VALID
WP is not for "scandal-mongering" WP:NOTSCANDAL
WP is not to broadcast your personal soapbox WP:SOAP
WP content requires not mere facts, but facts with impact or historical significance WP:NOTGUIDE
WP is not a collection of news reports WP:NOTNEWS
"Some material — sometimes even factually correct material — does not belong on Wikipedia, and removing it is not vandalism. Check to make sure that the addition was in line with Wikipedia standards, before restoring it or reporting its removal as vandalism." WP:NOTVAND
"Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews" WP:NOTNEWS
"Articles must be balanced to put entries, especially for current events, in a reasonable perspective, and represent a neutral point of view. Furthermore, Wikipedia authors should strive to write articles that will not quickly become obsolete." WP:SOAP
"it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic "WP:NTEMP
"Editorial bias toward one particular point of view should be removed " WP:NPOV Antisoapbox (talk) 13:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: old stale nonenyclopedic malpractice stuff

message: :Image:Milbank.gif 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 04:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Milbank.gif

message: I tagged this article with  and  because it has been largely written by .  Doing a whois lookup on this IP shows that it belongs to Milbank.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement, COI

message: according to the article (and reference i just added, plus others i read online) the company changed its name to Milbank LLP. should the page be moved to Milbank LLP? should LLP be included in the title if so, or should it be something like "Milbank (company) or "Milbank (law firm)?
im guessing the old name should be a page that should redirect to this too? Melodies1917 (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , page moved, and the old name redirects to it. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:44, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  move the page--LLP in the title?