Talk:European Audiovisual Observatory

Comments
We are suprised at the comments which have suddenly appeared on our page. This page has remained unchanged for a long time now and I have sumply enlisted the help of an administratot to add our logo - which was done very quickly - thank you for that help. This article is NOT an advert. The European Audiovisual Observatory is an information providor and part of the Coucnil of Europe in Strasbourg. There IS a reliable reference link - the link to out wenegre berg negre negre negre negre negre negre negre negrebsite at the bottom of the page. I frankly do not understand the comments which have suddenly appeared in response to the fact that I have added our logo!! Thank you Alison Hindhaugh Information Officer European Audiovisual Observatory —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audiovisual Observatory (talk • contribs)
 * The addition of the logo drew people's attention to the existence of the article. Language such as "reliable, up-to-date and relevant" and "remarkable" are examples of our problems here; such peacock words have no place in Wikipedia. In addition, as a marketing person for the subject of the article, you have a major conflict of interest and should not be editing this article at all other than to undo actual vandalism. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  07:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

@Orangemike: OK thanks for that quick feedback. A bit difficult - though! I'm not a marketing person. I'm the information officer and it's my job to publish institutional information about what we do. The main point of our existance is that we provide reliable and neutral statistics about the media in Europe. We do this as part of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. I do take issue a bit with the point of view that someone from an institutional organisation such as myself does not have the right to create an article. Surely we are the best informed as we are on the inside and have direct access to the information!! Surely you don't want me to mail my text to a member of my family so that they publish it....??? How can you possibly enforce that rule? I take your point though about 'peacock words' (good expression!) and will try and tone things down a bit. Kind regards from Strasbourg. Alison —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison Hindhaugh (talk • contribs) 08:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * An officer, employee or agent of an organization is unlikely to be able to maintain a neutral point of view on the topic. In addition, since the best interests of such a person are aligned with those of the subject organization, there is an inherent conflict of interest with regard to criticisms, failings, scandals and the like. This is only exacerbated when the employee's professional duty is to make the subject look good. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  08:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Point taken - but I'd be interested to know how you enforce this in practice. I've had a look at other European organisations listed in wikipedia - some of which have superb entries whci must have taken a lont tiem to create. You can be pretty sure that these beautiful pages were created by people working for them! Anyway. I've removed the peacock words. Take a look at our article and let me know what you think. Any tips much appreciated. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison Hindhaugh (talk • contribs) 08:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello there - we have very much taken into account the two comments which appeared on the page. We have deleted the 'peacock'/advert words and also pointed out that a link to our website in fact already exists at the bottom of the page. Advice would therefore be appreciated on the next step. How do we ensure that the two comment boxes disappear? We've done our bit! Cheers Alison Hindhaugh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.164.229.102 (talk) 12:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)