Talk:Larry Agran
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
POV needs to be fixed here...very biased in favor of Agran
editAgreed? Ajw522 (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- I have removed the tag as you did not follow with the required steps for its use as described at Template:POV, specifically "The editor who adds the tag should first discuss concerns on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, and should add this tag only as a last resort. In the absence of such a discussion, or where it remains unclear what the NPOV violation is, the tag may be removed by any editor."--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:19, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Larry Agran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011155032/http://www.ci.irvine.ca.us/council/bios/larry_agran.asp to http://www.ci.irvine.ca.us/council/bios/larry_agran.asp
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011155032/http://www.ci.irvine.ca.us/council/bios/larry_agran.asp to http://www.ci.irvine.ca.us/council/bios/larry_agran.asp
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061002211702/http://archives.cjr.org/year/92/2/opinion.asp to http://archives.cjr.org/year/92/2/opinion.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Neutral Point of View need to be Reviewed
editThis article has seen a significant number of edits in a short timespan that coincides with the declaration of Candidacy of the article's subject. Many of these edits provide good references but use words and phrases that are not from a neutral standpoint and seek cast the subject in a light that is not consistent with Wikipedia policy. Those sections referring the Irvine Great Park, in particular, seem to be intent on erasing the documented history of controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.234.230.103 (talk) 16:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Okay, what should be changed in the OC Great Park section, specifically? Chshmartutyun (talk) 22:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
For help with understanding maintenance templates please refer to WP:WTRMT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rearete (talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
After reading the article the relevant policies seem to be (WP:ADVOCACY) and (WP:NPOV). Important suggestions and guidelines editors should review are: (WP:WORDS) with emphases on (WP:PUFF), (MOS:SCAREQUOTES), and (WP:EDITORIALIZING). Rearete (talk) 00:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
I am aware of all of those guidelines. Please advise what should actually be modified, not general guidance. Otherwise remove the claim of lack of neutrality. Chshmartutyun (talk) 06:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I have removed some of the verbiage and peacock terms. It still has a promotional feel to it, and I fear my work may have just hidden that a little better. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC).
Anonymous Edits Have Changed Language to Exact Opposite of Sources
editAs of March 25, 2021, I noticed several changes that changed verbiage to be exact opposite of previous verbiage, changing the conclusions from the sources to the exact opposite. I have reverted to previous versions. Chshmartutyun (talk) 01:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)