Talk:Andreas Apostolopoulos

Untitled
Full disclosure: I know the subject of the article, and have some business dealings with him, so I made extra-sure to keep the article to sourced information from citable references. Anybody who wants to do more without my WP:COI limitations is welcome. Jmozena (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Andreas Apostolopoulos. 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:
 * Added tag to http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/al-lewis-selling-silverdome-shekels/
 * Added tag to http://outofbounds.nbcsports.com/2010/03/the-pontiac-silverdome-is-open-for-business-again.html.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100715121919/http://www.silverdomeevents.com:80/ to http://www.silverdomeevents.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive removal of sources and sourced info
As I have explained in your user talk page in the section "About sources", Wikipedia is based on the use of reliable sources. In your repeated removals of content the last weeks against several other editors, you have removed content based on what to me seems like reliable sources. You have even removed sources supporting text that still is in the article after your removal (source 1 and 5). All together you have thus removed six out of 14 sources:

Furthermore, in your three last reverts you have reverted grammatical and factual corrections I entered in my edit yesterday, without explanation. Wikipedia is a community project based on co-operation between editors. Your edit war style is in stark contrast to this. I will give you the chance to self revert and start discussing the sources here or at WP:RSN. If you choose to continue your edit war, you will surely be blocked from editing within short time. --T*U (talk) 13:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that the removal of this content by Infokeypad is unjustified. It looks a lot like an attempt to whitewash the article. The section on the Duffins Creek wetland controversy is well-sourced and relevant to the subject, since it is his company and his responsibility. Infokeypad has said that it is irrelevant, but not justified why it is irrelevant. The section should be replaced, but it is very clear that Infokeypad is willing to break Wikipedia's core rules in order to maintain their preferred version of the article. That is unacceptable behavior. you should revert your most recent edit and discuss here why you believe this material is irrelevant and help us reach a consensus. Laplorfill (talk) 18:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Also agree it's relevant. If the user takes issue with "Triple Group of Companies" information being on this page, a separate page could be created on that topic, with this article content shifted over and this page changed into a redirect. Infokeypad's contributions appear to be almost entirely reverts on this article and the Pontiac Silverdome article. Very little of their contributions seem to be in good faith. SECProto (talk) 22:14, 3 June 2021 (UTC)