Talk:Cesar Millan

Criticism and reference
Hello everyone,

There is a certain problem with the way this article has been written. I sincerely understand that any person presenting methods for dog's education should demonstrate its validity, preferably with scientific arguments, and it doesn't seem to be done. At the same time, I am really not convinced by the citation #36 (Fraser, Stephen (January 19, 2007), "Ruff Treatment", Current Science, 92 (10): 8) and its content on which relies most of the argued criticisms of the so-called section. It happens that Current Science is a journal which has seen its website copied several times by - apparently - predatory journals. On the official website from which I found link in the related wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Science), I was not able to find, with the given informations, the cited article. I am truly worried about the use of this citation which looks like a reference to authority (Look, this is an authentic scientific journal! It should be with strong, huge and complex arguments to be there...).

Sincerely


 * I cleaned up this section and blanked a lot of it. The whole Queen Latifa thing cited WP:TMZ. Using TMZ on a WP:BLP in this case is WP:FALSEBALANCE. Maybe this was an attorney trying to promote his case (hence the attorney's name being red linked). If someone has a problem with this, feel free to discuss here and ping me. I also removed some 'scientific journal' that doesnt agree with the article subject, that itself lacks a wikipedia page (often an easy way to rule out of something is due). Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:32, 24 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I have again removed the WP:LONGQUOTE which you re-added. Dont re-add it again without finding consensus here. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 04:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I also noted your account appears to be an WP:SPA with a possible WP:COI for the purpose of promoting an attorney that filed a case against the article subject. It appears you might be attempting to justify notability of attorney Brian Adesman, who you also have tried to create an article for. This is not ok at wikipedia. I have removed all mention of Adesman from this article out of an abundance of caution, it is in fact irrelevant who is the non-notable attorney Draft:Brian_Adesman that filed a case against this article subject. Efforts at WP:PROMO are not acceptable here or on any other article. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

stolen prt 8.3.123.167 (talk) 16:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

@User:98.116.234.227, please stop adding references to Adesman. Regardless of whether you're connected with the above account or not, it looks like promotional editing to put the focus on the attorneys who filed the case, rather than the case itself. Rusalkii (talk) 22:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC)