User talk:JulesH/Archive June 06

Literary agent pages
Please stop creating pages designed only to disparage the subject matter. The literary agencies you have been writing about may indeed be bad, but at Wikipedia we are supposed to use a neutral point of view. Pages can be speedily deleted for being attack pages. Erik the Rude 00:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for my zeal in having what I thought were attack pages deleted. Perhaps listing these questionable publishing houses in one location would be a good idea? At any rate, I'm not an admin, so I don't have the final say in deletion. I just put up a tag indicating that I thought they were attack pages. If for some strange reason you'd like my input on how to get a NPOV on such pages, let me know, and I'll do my best to help. I hate seeing people get ripped off too. Erik the Rude 19:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I just stopped by to say what a good job you've done with the reinstated BB page, and not just because you restored some of my lost words. Making the substance of the entry as clear as possible, staying as neutral as possible, and substantiating with sources from more than one POV seems like the best way to go here. Thanks! --Karen 10:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

They are attack pages. A frustrated writer takes on a scam agent. Sounds like a logline.Marky48 02:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)