User talk:Neptune95

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Balletsj, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. It is also worth noting that Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which specifically link them to one company or corporation. If your username does have such a name, it would be advisable for you to request a change of username.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! You can also just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Mirokado (talk) 01:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

San Jose Ballet[edit]

In addition to the potential conflict of interest revealed by your edit summary, your change removed content supported by reliable sources, We are generally speaking not allowed to do that. If you can find other reliable sources which contradict these then we (you, I or whoever) would of course update the article so it is balanced. --Mirokado (talk) 01:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing these issues to my attention. Although this account carries the organization's name, I am the only person with access to it; I have requested a name change. As for refuting the "reliable" sources listed on the Ballet's page, are there any other avenues available to me as far as refuting them? At this time, there have been no retractions or other official statements made, but the information in the cited articles is sensationalized and unsubstantiated. Thanks again for your help. Balletsj (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Balletsj[reply]

--

Having read through the available Wikipedia materials, I feel I now understand the situation. Because Ballet News is an internet blog run by an individual journalist rather than a newspaper or other established news organization, I feel that this is an unreliable source according to Wikipedia’s “Burden of Evidence” policy. In this policy, Wikipedia states:

Anyone can create a personal web page or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.[4] Take care when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else will probably have done so.[5] Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.

Nowhere does the "accredited journalist" at Ballet News provide links to her work with established publications. She does not provide a last name. While she does provide a "Testimonials" page, these quotes all come from online users and should not be considered evidence of her expertise.

There are several factual errors in the Ballet News blog post, including the following:

“Ballet San Jose (BSJ), a well-respected non-profit charity and the second largest ballet company in Southern California.” – This is false. Ballet San Jose is located in Northern California, about an hour south of San Francisco. The blog post should be considered unreliable just for this first statement alone.

“Subsequently, AGMA filed a grievance against BSJ for several violations of the CBA in their hire of Carlos Acosta, regarding engaging him without a union contract, and there is a pending arbitration on January 18th 2012.” – This statement cannot be substantiated; even if it can be substantiated, it should not have been made public prior to an alleged legal process. It should not be allowed to remain on the Wikipedia page for legal reasons.

"Sources close to the company fear that an announcement due in early January, possibly the 3rd, will herald the dismissal of Nahat and the installation of company Principal dancer Alexsandra Meijer as the new Artistic Director." – This assertion by Ballet News does not cite a reliable source. While the Chronicle article does bring up some statements that are also made in the Ballet News blog, the above statement about Dennis Nahat’s rumored replacement is contradicted by a second SF Chronicle article that includes official statements from Ballet San Jose. This second article states: “Contrary to rumor, Ballet San Jose is not hiring a new artistic director to replace Dennis Nahat.”

Please read the first SF Chronicle article and note that the following statement from the Wikipedia page deliberately misconstrues what is actually written in the article: “Over the past two years the chairman of the board, John Fry (co-founder of Fry's Electronics), has assumed administrative and artistic control of the company, including choice of dancers, their rank, casting and repertory.” The actual Chronicle article states that “those close to the company assert that the force behind most of these changes is the ballet board’s chairman, John C. Fry, the CEO of Fry's Electronics.”

Nowhere in the Chronicle article is it stated that John Fry has already assumed control of the company and its artistic decisions. If that statement is made in the Ballet News blog, I have already demonstrated that it is an unreliable news source.

For the aforementioned reasons, I would like to remove the paragraphs in question from the Wikipedia page because they cite an unreliable source. Any statements attributed to the SF Chronicle article should be reworded to reflect the actual information given in both SF Chronicle articles on the subject. Please advise. Balletsj (talk) 19:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Balletsj[reply]

Thanks for your detailed response which gives me enough to work with. I will read both the SF articles and the BN article in the light of what you say above and post again. --Mirokado (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generally I agree that Ballet News is not "reliable" in Wikipedia's technical sense for contentious information such as was used here, particularly involving living people. Having said that, there are also, for example, interviews with dancers which I have been happy to add to articles as external links (i.e. adding value for the reader rather than supporting information in the article). Clearly the company's artistic direction is unclear at present, as covered by the SF Chronicle, and I have tried to retain that information without irrelevant personal issues. I've also added some information about the collaboration with ABT.

Some of the current content can be updated as soon as the 2012 season is announced. Of course other editors may well make further updates and the article certainly needs further work. I will continue to "pay attention" to it as time allows now I have started editing there.

We normally discuss the development of an article on the article's talk page so that all interested editors will see the conversations, and use the user talk pages for anything more involving perticular users, so please use the article talk page for general discussions about improving the article. Of course we can also continue this conversation as necessary. --Mirokado (talk) 02:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change of Name[edit]

I do not see that changing the name on this account improves matters; in fact it worsens them, as it would seem to be an attempt to conceal the author's intrinsic conflict-of interest in Ballet San Jose so clearly expressed in his or her edit summary:

As an official representative of Ballet San Jose, I have removed FALSE information about the organization as per Marketing Director Lee Kopp's (lkopp@balletsj.org) instructions. Contact me with questions at edessenberger@balletsj.org.

— Robert Greer (talk) 02:41, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this user has responded to our concerns constructively. The change of name request is exactly what users are asked to do in this situation and although users are advised to be very careful indeed about editing the related articles (and I would in fact advise them not to) there is in fact no prohibition. There are suggestions about how to provide a note on the user page to properly declare an interest but I really don't have time to go looking for them now, more from me as necessary tomorrow evening. --Mirokado (talk) 02:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have found the Wikipedia section about "Declaring a Conflict of Interest" and read it, but I am linking it here for everyone's reference. The section gives several options, including a sample note. In the future, if I wish to suggest an edit for the sake of neutrality, how would you suggest I approach declaring my conflict of interest in relation to this page, Mirokado? It seems like the best route would be to make my suggestion on the general talk page while clearly identifying myself, as seen in the sample note. Balletsj (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Balletsj[reply]

Yes a note such as that on the article talk page would be fine. Tarnya was responding to what was a far more serious situation: I think it would be fine for you to make minor changes like typo corrections yourself, or uncontroversial changes such as updating the list of dancers, if you wish (please provide a clear edit summary with each change). You could say something like "I will request anything other than a clearly minor or uncontroversial change on the talk page". It is not necessary for you to reveal your own name. Particularly if you enable the email option for your account it would not be necessary to provide an email address. It is up to watchers of the article and recent changes in general to make sure that you normally do not have to intervene to request potentially controversial corrections. --Mirokado (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will make sure to stick to that policy for any future minor changes or suggested changes. Thank you for your help! I appreciate your comments and your patience very much. -Neptune95 (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]