Talk:Richard Kovacevich: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Views: new section |
Tag: |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|blp=yes|listas=Kovacevich, Richard| |
|||
{{WikiProject Biography |
{{WikiProject Biography }} |
||
|living=yes |
|||
{{WikiProject Business}} |
|||
|class= |
|||
|listas=Kovacevich, Richard |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
== Views == |
== Views == |
||
I removed a clumsily-written paragraph that had been based on a clickbaity Business Insider hitpiece. The fact that this guy told Bloomberg he thought maybe older people could consider going back to work in April is not particularly noteworthy much less worthy of the negative slant being applied here. If it were worth including this at all we'd want to source the original Bloomberg article and not the BI one with its ramped-up rhetoric and looser editorial standards...but the (still a bit clickbaity) |
I removed a clumsily-written paragraph that had been based on a clickbaity Business Insider hitpiece. The fact that this guy told Bloomberg he thought maybe older people could consider going back to work in April is not particularly noteworthy much less worthy of the negative slant being applied here. If it were worth including this at all we'd want to source the original Bloomberg article and not the BI one with its ramped-up rhetoric and looser editorial standards...but the (still a bit clickbaity) Bloomberg Article [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-25/billionaires-want-people-back-to-work-workers-aren-t-so-sure seen here] portrays Kovacevich as just one of probably dozens of people with similar opinions at a similar time. |
||
--[[User:Blogjack|Blogjack]] ([[User talk:Blogjack|talk]]) 19:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 18:37, 4 February 2024
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
#4 of References
[edit]That select quote is pretty self-serving and an opinion, so I'm removing it.--LedgerTom (talk) 17:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Views
[edit]I removed a clumsily-written paragraph that had been based on a clickbaity Business Insider hitpiece. The fact that this guy told Bloomberg he thought maybe older people could consider going back to work in April is not particularly noteworthy much less worthy of the negative slant being applied here. If it were worth including this at all we'd want to source the original Bloomberg article and not the BI one with its ramped-up rhetoric and looser editorial standards...but the (still a bit clickbaity) Bloomberg Article seen here portrays Kovacevich as just one of probably dozens of people with similar opinions at a similar time. --Blogjack (talk) 19:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC)