Talk:Tim Michels

message: This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because the recent pages done to the page was done to update/change the picture.  During that change, if other changes where "rolled back" or modified, it was by mistake.  The only thing that was trying to be changed was the picture, not any of the text/information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikimichels (talk • contribs) 21:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion 

message: I can't help but think this article is being targeted for deletion by someone with bias themselves.  Taking a look at the WP:NPOVFAQ, you can see that the current article meets the requirements.
The NPOV policy is used sometimes as an excuse to delete texts that are perceived as biased. Isn't this a problem?
 
Editors have different ideas about how Wikipedia should look "today". Some want it to be as fault-free as possible, even if that means cutting mediocre content; others think that all but the most serious flaws should be allowed to stand so they can be improved.
 
While the burden of establishing verifiability and reliability rests on those who are challenged about it, there is usually no need to immediately delete text that can instead be rewritten as necessary over time. Obvious exceptions are articles about living people or clear vandalism, but generally there is no need for text to meet the highest standards of neutrality today if there's a reasonable chance of getting there.
 
Also, determining whether a claim is true or useful, particularly when few people know about the topic, often requires a more involved process to get the opinions of other editors. It's a good idea to raise objections on a talk page or at a relevant WikiProject. Discussing contentious claims helps editors to evaluate their accuracy and often leads to better sourcing and clearer phrasing.
 
Especially contentious text can be removed to the talk page if necessary, but only as a last resort, and never just deleted.
 
It is a frequent misunderstanding of the NPOV policy, often expressed by newbies, visitors, and outside critics, that articles must not contain any form of bias, hence their efforts to remove statements they perceive as biased. The NPOV policy does forbid the inclusion of editorial bias, but does not forbid properly sourced bias. Without the inclusion and documentation of bias in the real world, many of our articles would fail to document the sum total of human knowledge, and would be rather "blah" reading, devoid of much meaningful and interesting content.
Pontificator (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of neutrality as an excuse to delete 

message: Material sourced to a (highly partisan) personal blog has been inserted into this article. RightWisconsin is not a legitimate news source.  Find alternative refs before reinserting  174.198.11.200 (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone put back the material ref’d to a conservative? blog in Wisconsin. It’s clearly not Reliable Source for a BLP. I undid. 89.233.155.187 (talk) 07:55, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper Non-Reliable Source information.  

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion