Talk:Activate (organisation)

--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Originating editor's message
Just to note to everyone, I am not connected or support to either Activate, the Conservative Party or Momentum. I have wrote this just to made some note of this organisation. 159753 (talk) 18:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Article tagged as WP:COI
Whilst I have a keen interest in the organisation I can confirm I am not directly affiliated with them. Also, I note that you have defined "Major contribution". The net change by myself has been 160 bits of data, the two largest additions being +61 and +142, which saw the addition of the country of operation and the addition of the new logo. The largest removal being -37 bits was the removal of that same country of operation.

As such, such a tag is completely inaccurate and unnecessary and as such I move to remove it. -- Im Cheating 01/20/2018 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Im Cheating (talk • contribs) 02:04, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no 'minor contributor' alternative to "major contributor" as used on the mainspace; has an established past as ActivateUK, then as Sam Ancliff (politician) and as Im Cheating all of which are too close to the article, which is intended to promote a quasi-political group. Also this permalink shows an initial Conflict of Interest declaration mentioning Sam Ancliff (Politician), and the upload details for the portrait File:SamAncliffActivate.jpg would suggest that Sam Ancliff IRL is either User:Im Cheating, or closely connected. As an involved editor you have no right of censure over this templating. You are requested not to edit the main content of this article and Sam Ancliff.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 03:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Unconnected reader's comment
Forgive me as a passer-by; but having seen the flag on the article I've looked further to see why. From what it seems most of these supposed sources all essentially link back mostly to claims or refutations sourced back to the group that is subject to the article, or this Sam Ancliff who is proposed to be a major contributor to the article - can the article be considering impartial in this sense, and if not would it not be more appropriate for deletion unless cleaned up to a more appropriate standard? --82.34.160.168 (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Committee list
IP editor 86.178.13.20 has added a list of committee members to the infobox. I can't see why the identity of anybody except Markwell is noteworthy enough to mention in the article at all. The group lasted less than a year and didn't achieve anything; I don't see what encyclopaedic merit there is in cataloguing the identities of the people who were on its committee. The Red Pepper article that is used to include them only concerns itself with the identities of the committee members in the sense of its lack of diversity and offensive comments attributed to Fizarn Adris, so I can't see that due weight has been established. Ralbegen (talk) 20:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)