Talk:Tyler Shields

Recent edits
A recent series of edits removed sourced content and also added some statements that were not backed-up by the cited sources. The article was reverted to its previous content because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that relies on reliable sources especially for biographies of living people. If editors think some information about Mr. Shields should be in this article then that information needs to be backed-up by reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, books, news-shows...sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy and with editorial oversight. If editors think some content should be deleted from the article then those issues should be discussed on this talk page. Shearonink (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The changes above need to be discussed. An editor is blanking sourced content and replacing that content with assertions that are unsupported by their cited references.  This article is part of an encyclopedia.  It does not exist to push any particular POV, either for or against Mr. Shields.  In its present state it violates WP:NPOV. Shearonink (talk) 17:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In light of the fact that the editor has not responded to my concerns, I am adding the sourced content back in to the article plus doing some general copyediting (fixing the malformed refs that were in their content, adjusting some wording, etc.) Shearonink (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

User:Maria226422 - Please discuss your continuing edits to this article. Shearonink (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You have added assertions with malformed references that do not contain the cited information.
 * You have deleted reliably-sourced information.
 * You have done all this repeatedly without responding to any of my concerns posted here or on your talk page.
 * You have repeatedly stated the sourced information was "incorrect, harmful, and downright despicable" as well as "outdated and incorrect". Please explain your phraseology here.

User:Maria226422 - I restored the Vice magazine content & reference. Please discuss your concerns about that content & the source here. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:56, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Fraser Kee Scott
The following may be of some use since the source is very good:

There are also a couple of news articles (from the L.A. Times and/or L.A. Weekly, I think) floating around alleging that much of Shields photography work was plagiarised from others, but I don't have the time nor inclination to dig those up. Laval (talk) 20:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits & my reversion
I just now reverted the condition of this article back to the last clean version I could find. I wanted to explain why. Recently, there was content added that had a definite POV and contained unneeded pejorative adjectives. Also, sourced content & references had been deleted by a single editor in a series of edits in late June. I apologize if I have deleted or reverted or removed valid content in the course of my reversion but it seemed like the best way to handle getting the article into better condition. Shearonink (talk) 06:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Note regarding possible COI editing by Tyler Shields or his staff 2
it seems like this is still happening because all the critical reviews of dude's work keep getting deleted. sad wikipedia can't maintain a unbiased deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.246.36.198 (talk) 15:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * DUDE. The content that you added and that 209.254.146.125 (the other IP-editor involved in your edit war) added is redundant in that it is using the same source *and* it is also removing additional sourced content and its source.  Have you actually  read  the before/after versions?
 * AND. The edit summary is highly inflammatory, edit summaries are not the place to fling around accusations. You wrote:
 * "the content is well sourced and relevant. i highly suspect you are tyler as you keep removing critical reviews from your own page. the relevant information will remain until this has been determined.)
 * As it was worded, the content verges into an attack on a living person, it uses unneeded pejorative adjectives that are not present in the source - this type of tone is against WP:BLP. Have you read that page?  ALSO did you look at the content that you reverted?  In addition to deleting the VICE reference from the lead section, you deleted the reference and you deleted content from one of the photographers - Harry Leutwyler - where Leutwyler directly calls out Shields on his apparent plagiarism. Shearonink (talk) 17:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)