User talk:KrisW6
Howdy. First of all, I can't tell if anyone's welcomed you to Wikipedia yet. Either way, welcome!
As for Michael Jackson – yeah, it has a lot of issues with POV, but typically that tag is only added to articles if there is an editor or group of editors that have specific issues they'd like to hammer out with the article. Anonymous Jackson supporters and detractors are constantly adding crap to the article, and it's very hard to keep up. That being the case, keeping a POV tag on the article in perpetuity for general POV-ness is, IMHO, not so good an idea. If you've got specific issues you'd like to address, feel free to do so at Talk:Michael Jackson. I watch the article regularly for vandalism and the aforementioned POV edits, and am always willing to discuss changes. Cheers, android79 02:04, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the Welcome. My first one!
- Thanks also for the info re:POV box. I know what you mean and will bear it in mind for the future. KrisW6 17:40, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Regarding these edits that have been made to the Michael Jackson article. Do you have any sources for the information that you have put? →Journalist >>talk<< 00:33, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Source regarding edits to FTBOMH
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171414,00.html
“But even more interesting are two more people new to the crowd: Atlanta music business attorney Joel Katz and Island/DefJam Records chairman Antonio L.A. Reid. Their project is simple. My sources say that Katz has come to represent the Prince (of Bahrain) in a deal that would fund a record label for Jackson at Island/DefJam’s parent, Universal Music Group.”
WP:NOADS
Just a heads-up on your "No Ads" box on your user page -- it seems that controversy has largely passed and was probably blown out of proportion to begin with. I'm not really taking a position one way or another, but I just wanted to let you know.--chris.lawson 07:55, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Michael Jackson NPOV issues
Admins generally won't block 3RR vios unless the user was warned prior to violating, or if it's VERY egregious. As he's now been warned, any further reversions will probably result in a block, but his fourth revert that he's already made may or may not. You're welcome to report on WP:AN/3RR if you wish; we might get lucky.--chris.lawson 08:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, KrisW6. How are you?
Ive noticed some of your edits to the Michael Jackson article. For example :this and this. Do you have any rational reasons to remove these edits. How can you be particularly sure that they are "untrue"?
Here are a couple sources for the info you requested:
- "Thriller" in the Guinness Book of World Records as the "world's biggest-selling album ever" Guinness World record
- Two sources showing the Michael Jackson is the "Best selling solo artist of all time". He received an award from the World Music Awards proving this:news source and World Music awards page
These sources are both independent and authoritative,(not fansites). Ive since reverted your edits to the article. If you still have any issues, please let me know. Thanks. Oran e (t) (c) (@) 01:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)