Talk:Pam Krueger

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Pam Krueger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090202183201/http://awrt.org:80/awards/gracies.html to http://www.awrt.org/awards/gracies.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091029224231/http://www.womcom.org:80/awards/2009/Clarion.asp to http://www.womcom.org/awards/2009/Clarion.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Help Make This Page Unbiased/Non-Advertise-y
Hi all,

Just wondering how I can edit the content so it doesn't advertise, and what sources I can remove that are too closely associated with the subject. Thanks and ask me any questions about the changes on my talk page, linked below.

User talk:Callisony

For example, is it possible to change the MoneyTrack section to say:

In 2005, Krueger launched MoneyTrack. The series aired on 255 PBS stations. Her first book, The MoneyTrack Method: The Real Person's Guide to Successful Investing, was released in October 2008.

I know there are issues when talking about current projects insofar as it can be seen as soapboxing, but is appearing on PBS shows not notable?

Callisony User talk:Callisony

From another page
Hi, I wanted to qualify my edits to the Pam Krueger page as I'm attempting to remove the biased content that resulted in it getting an advertising banner. I would like to restore my edits and I'll document my changes a better. If you have any suggestions they're welcome but my goal is ultimately to submit the content in that first edit with better references.

@Callisony Thanks for your concern. I'm restoring the awards section. The edit that tagged this article as advertising mentioned specific phrasing in other sections of the article, not the award section; per WP:ASSERT, asserting a fact (ie Person X won an award)is not asserting an opinion; other articles list the awards people won. I'm also restoring the cleanup tags: the references still are either connected to the subject or from the Internet Movie Database, which doesn't have good editorial control. In addition, I noticed on your userpage that you are being paid by the Pam Krueger. Due to this fact, I don't think it is appropriate for you to remove an advertising tag from an article that you have these connections with.

@talk) Thanks for explaining the initial reasoning for the tag. I'm still pretty new to editing; when I edit the article to remove the phrasing that seems like advertising, do I get an unbiased third party to review it and remove the tag, or is that still biased? I removed the awards section as I was instructed by my employer to do so, though that may be in order to remove bias. However if I could keep that revised I'd appreciate it. *EDIT*: I see it's preferred I suggest edits (Callisony) (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Would using the MoneyTrack.org website be suitable as a reference or is it too closely related to the subject? (Callisony) (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I would keep the tag: there are lists of articles sorted by what cleanup tags they have; I don't feel qualified in assessing what constitutes advertising and what doesn't. If someone who is paying you told you to make an edit, you should not make it but suggest it on the talkpage so that the other editors can discuss it; see WP:PAY. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral, so major changes you make should be proposed on the talkpage; fixing links is fine, I think. The Moneytrack site is affiliated with Pam Krueger, so it's still not independent. You want to find people who don't have any connection or interest in the subject of the article (ie mainstream newspaper). For more info, you can consult WP:IS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callisony (talk • contribs) 21:40, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Revision
I've changed some of the content on this page to improve its neutrality Achaeoptyryx

Will someone pls confirm my changes resolve the tags? Achaeoptyryx —Preceding undated comment added 22:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)