Talk:Prison consultant

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section promoting Michael Sabo has been removed again

Jamesie1 (talk · contribs) is a single-purpose account that insists on adding an unsourced, advertisement-like section about fraudster/consultant Michael Sabo. This section has been removed several times for being unsourced, as well as for failing the notability test. Individuals currently mentioned in this article are notable, and the notability of each is supported by mentions in reliable sources. Notable contributions of each are described, and sources given.

Wikipedia is not a business directory to list anyone and everyone who practices in a particular field. I've searched and found nothing to indicate Sabo is notable as a prison consultant, the subject of this article. Yes, there is a Michael Sabo article in Wikipedia, but having an article here does not confer notability. In any event, that article is poorly sourced and unlikely to stand up to a deletion discussion if challenged. Jamesie1, if you have reliable sources supporting Sabo's notability as a prison consultant, please post them below for discussion and consensus before re-adding any material on him. --CliffC (talk) 02:08, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't see why any of the people without Wikipedia articles should be in here in the first place. Drmies (talk) 18:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Practitioners section is nothing more than an advertisement section. There are many other notable prison consultants not listed.

Blanking out of entire section

This article was brought to my attention through a vandalism tool because of its drastic removal of an entire section. I appreciate the comments of the IP user that made the changes, but a switch like this cannot be done without prior conversations in this same Talk Page. If this section serves as a promotional platform (which it also appears to me), please, do not just erase it. Actions like this will just provoke reactions in the opposite direction. Bring the topic here, propose the changes, and follow through. If, for any chance, editors here were not helpful, you always can request experienced editors to help in arbitration or just bring your case to the arbitration committee.

I'm much more concerned that any section like this will contain BLP violations, than I am about promotional content, though both were present and both are a reason to nuke the section. Please note that you restored content claiming that several people were former federal prisoners, without any source to support the claim that these men had been in prison. As such, I will be removing the section again. However, even if the material is sourced, I believe it should be removed as promotional content without any encyclopedic value. Please don't restore it wothout a good reason; the onus is on the person adding the content to justify it. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 07:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Richard gall

please stop removing Richard gall. Brainstorm Prison Consultants of Gallservices is his company his is one of the few who have actual proof they where in prison on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btchpissed (talk • contribs) 21:08, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]