Talk:John Hardy (jewelry)

Dear 125.24.157.80

In the interests of transparency, I wanted to alert you to the fact that I have edited your Wikipedia entry on John Hardy on behalf of the company, John Hardy International Limited. Specifically, I have reverted the article to the previous version saved by User Flowanda on 9 July 2008.

The reason for the edit is that the additional quote substantively skews the piece in favour of a litigant in an ongoing legal case. The resulting article does not meet the standards for conflict of interest or impartiality required by Wikipedia.

Since John Hardy International Limited is also involved in the case, I believe that it would be a similar conflict for me to edit the article more completely. For that reason I have instead reverted to a version that has been reviewed by an demonstrably independent third party.

I trust that you will understand the reasons for this action. Might I suggest that further discussion on appropriate content relating to this case be confined to the talk pages in the interests of maintaining a balanced and fair point of view.

Kind regards

Steveb482 (talk) 10:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Wikipedia is not interested in your companies version of your company. Everything must be based on 3rd party published facts. The insinuation of the allegations are that your company copyrighed already existing traditional Balinese designs. A form of "culture piracy." If, in fact, your company is the origin of the disputed designs then that will be settled in court. To best serve your case on Wikipedia please add any 3rd party published references in your favor, specially the court ruling. Wikipedia is a living encylopedia.--125.24.124.187 (talk) 13:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the invitation to take this to the Talk pages. Agree entirely that Wikipedia is not interested in the company's view of the company. That is why, in deference to Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, I was open about my affiliation with John Hardy International. Neither I nor the company I represent will undertake to edit the entry save to revert to a previous version edited by a credible third party. Given the discussion that Flowanda has opened below, we prefer to leave the oversight of this page to the Wikipedia community at large.

Best

Steveb482 (talk) 23:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Biographies of living persons noticeboard[edit]

I started a discussion about differentiating between the person and the company here: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#John Hardy (jewelry). Flowanda | Talk 17:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies; I do not believe my continued involvement in this discussion will be helpful, but I do not want the article's issues or the editors involved -- no matter if they go by names or numbers -- to go unaddressed. Flowanda | Talk 23:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologise - happy to let the editorial process run its course. Thanks for your input to date. Steveb482 (talk)

I just commented there:

Reviewing it further, and reading the references, there seems to be material for 2 articles, the person and the firm. The first NYT article [1] is about the man specifically, though it isn't really independent, since he wrote it--but the NYT did publish it very prominently , and the third [2] is independent, and seems equally about both. The WWD article and others on the firm's website show the notability of the jewelry. As for the allegations, they are against the firm and belong only in that article. If there is any implication of personal involvement, that needs to be sourced--and I'm not sure would be significant content in the article about the person.

I remind Flowanda though that RSs are nonethe less RSs when behind a paywall, and belong in the reference section. Dead reference links, also, are marked as such. and not removed. Two of the NYT items are RS references, not links. I moved these, but I rely on Steve to finish fixing this, as I do for him to divide the articles. I made one or two edits to clarify the BLP situation as well--they should have been made long ago. DGG (talk) 00:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

COI: Blockc[edit]

I have tag'd the page with a WP:COI tag due to the persistent advertorial edits of Blockc. Today's were added all with no edit summaries. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 16:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Hardy (jewelry). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John Hardy (jewelry). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]