Talk:Realty One Group

Recent edit to include the deletion of a specific allegation on case number 30-2013-00667494-CU-OE-CJC, Danielle M Snyder Potter v. Realty One Group, a California Corporation in Orange County Superior Court in California, United States was made due to a specific change in the case status, record of action, and official court record in December of 2016 in which, according to court record, the case was dismissed with prejudice by the court upon receiving the motion to dismiss and recant their statement, which was submitted by the plaintiff and accuser, making the accusation withdrawn, therefore the information listed within the article is no longer accurate and/or constructive. Records were obtained directly from Orange County Superior Court at cited source above to verify that this was in fact the case.

Additional edits were made, constructively adding new information about new leadership and supposed recognitions received as a company or leadership, sourced, and adding an additional source that was located regarding Realty One Group agents in the media. Hope this information helps clarify the latest revision and edit summary.

136.60.206.200 (talk) 03:57, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Inside editing notice and related sock investigation
Hi - I'm a guild of copy editors gnome. I cleaned up this article in early August to remove the advert tag, and last week one of the socks flagged in Sockpuppet investigations/Yoodaba,, added poorly sourced promotional info. KittyKatey had also made some similarly poor promotional edits in April, May and June. You properly reverted the edit, and, which looks like a maintenance bot or otherwise new account dedicated to maintenance, tagged the article for inside editing. (Note the two edit summaries that accidentally cropped off the "a" at the end of Yoodaba [] [] - I'm also a pedant). There was no corresponding note posted on the talk page, so this note will serve as reader notification. There are other problematic SPA/IP accounts in the history, but with my cleanup, I'd already already removed the poorly sourced content and fixed the overly promotional tone. Your recent edits inadvertently added back minor personnel moves sourced with a press release source, which is WP:NOTNEWS. But I'm more concerned that you restored the report of the CEO's sexual assault into a dedicated "controversy" section, which violates WP:STRUCTURE. It's also problematic since I can't find any resolution of the case. The note above this one says the case has been dismissed, but as is all too common to protect privacy, the case may be sealed. Without a clear resolution for us to source, this info will stay here forever, and that sends us into WP:AVOIDVICTIM territory. Adding to this issue, the account that added the accusations in 2016 hasn't made any other edits before or since - see Special:Contributions/Akaufman05. There may have been an agenda to hurt the company. I'd like to keep this balanced, and not appear that the restoration of the assault allegations to the company article is in any way meant to be punitive for the history of inside editing. BTW - of the sources you added back, one is a dead archived link and the other is mistitled. I didn't bother fixing them myself in case you decide to remove the info. Cheers! TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  01:36, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . Thanks for the heads-up, that was sloppy editing on my part. I've removed both paragraphs mentioned. Best, Paisarepa (talk) 02:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)