982:
There has not been any presentation of an objection to a
Mitchberg edit on the NARN article. This absence in the months since this tag was placed should be viewed as a concession that the COI tag is not applicable. (2) The following quotes from the COI page go hand in hand. "n editor with a self-evident conflict of interest turning up on the talk page is an indication that they are playing it straight" and "Many Wikipedians show their allegiances and affiliations on their user pages." Considering this done by Mitchberg on Feb 20, 2006 implies him being affiliated with NARN it is reasonable to consider that edit as a declaration of that affiliation.
352:
334:
278:
635:
617:
423:
219:
645:
268:
250:
21:
1252:, and not just in this case. Knowledge's current "notability" rules do not handle New Media very well, IMO. For instance, searching Google for blogs and blog-related radio shows tends to find posts at popular blogs, so you have to do lots of work to find the Old Media mentions that Knowledge rules demand. One day we'll solve this problem.
790:
The "notability" criteria as applied here (and as I noted in my remarks below) are fairly myopic. The
Northern Alliance is a new media outlet, composed of new media figures. To say its references are primarily on blogs and forums - new media, by definition - doesn't establish notability ignores the
752:
I am removing the notability tag. The radio station that carries the show covers an area with more than 1.5 million people. As Mitch said, it draws 20,000 podcast downloads per week, from all over the country. They interview prominent politicians and play a prominent role in local politics. The NARN
981:
page one ought to realize that (1) The absence of a POV edit negates the application of COI tagging. The COI guideline states "Editors who may have a conflict of interest are allowed to make certain kinds of non-controversial edits...If another good faith editor objects, then it's controversial."
945:
But I also think it's interesting that this article ran un-noticed for about two years, until a couple of regional left-wing bloggers wrote a piece about my wikipedia editing history (I've edited a few piece on stories in which I'm involved - although, again, one can not find a single bit of POV in
797:
Finally - as I noted below, I've largely abandoned
Knowledge; trying to edit anything remotely political draws a horde of Kossacks; Knowledge is in the process of marginalizing itself, at least when anything remotely political is at issue. So it's interesting that after two years without a single
931:
As to folding it into WWTC - on the one hand I don't much care. I've come to believe editing
Knowledge, at least on subject where there's any political exposure, is a complete waste of time. On the other hand, the show isn't purely about WWTC; we're on the 'net, and if WWTC went out of business
985:
Obviously there is no basis for the tag, it has been on the page for a considerable amount of time all without any justification. Simply tagging an article for the sake of "keep an eye on it " is a poor purpose and poor precedent. If this standard for a COI tag is accepted imagine the similar
1023:
blog as "Blog of the Year" and the
Northern Alliance Radio Network. If it's a blog it doesn't establish the notability of the Northern Alliance Radio Network ; if it's a reliable source, then it does. Searching Time Inc.'s site, I got hits for the
1216:
You say the article isnt' notable because tje "first 150 hits are all from blogs, forums". Since the
Northern Alliance is an alternative media production (a radio talk show) composed of alternative media figures (bloggers), doesn't that stand to
442:
767:
I will also remove the conflict of interest tag. If someone can cite where one of Mitch's edits displays any bias towards the organization of which he is a part, then add the tag back. After reading the whole article, I see no bias.
181:
1029:
801:
While I don't really care - and doubt I'll follow through on this - I'm going to give everyone a month, give or take, to establish any actual conflict, POV or notability problems. And then I'm going to remove the taqs.
1025:
31:
1121:
905:
qualifies, then I fail to see how the
Northern Alliance doesn't; for four years, it's been the first all-blogger radio program; we draw presidential candidates and A-list pundits and authors.
175:
72:
986:
standard being applied throughout
Knowledge...nearly every article would have the tag. (I do appreciate the rationale presented by the tagger but find it contrary to common sense.)
1165:
1245:
Apologies for not making myself clear enough. I'm only saying that the first 150 hits failed to establish notability. Maybe #151 would establish notability? I don't know.
1078:
446:
1279:
has been restored as well. Sorry, but someone who is a member of the
Alliance removing the tags from the article is a fairly clear case of conflict of interest.--
1083:
1298:
1206:
without seeing any notability-establishing items. That doesn't mean there aren't any, it just means the first 150 hits are all from blogs, forums, etc. Cheers,
532:
1303:
1073:
1058:
798:
comment, the"notability" and "conflict" tags pop up within weeks after a couple of regional leftybloggers wrote a tittery article about my
Knowledge edits.
1155:
1328:
1308:
1063:
463:
107:
1333:
1093:
476:
1145:
1088:
1068:
551:
300:
1131:
196:
1318:
918:
As Chris notes, I could be perceived as having a conflict of interest - but I fairly strictly abjured making any POV statements in the piece.
113:
163:
667:
1323:
544:
362:
794:
As far as point of view goes - nobody has shown any examples of point of view or conflict of interest in the piece. Any luck so far?
459:
291:
255:
483:
1313:
384:
157:
989:
I propose the removal of the tag in absence of a reasonable justification (beyond condemnation for something not yet done). --
901:
I wrote the piece, almost two years ago. I think someone might need to do a little more home work about "notability" - if the
858:
787:
This article was written in August of 2005. In over two years, there wasn't a single question about the article's notability.
723:
658:
622:
127:
58:
52:
1253:
1207:
869:
132:
48:
1036:
Anyone have opinions on that webpronews.com post? Any additional citations to establish notability would also be helpful. --
708:
I removed the notability tag; the show draws 20,000 podcast downloads a week, and books presidential candidates as guests.
153:
570:
102:
453:
435:
230:
203:
1222:
And why wouldn't notability within the context of the alternative media (itself a notable concept) qualify as notable?
834:
705:
I removed the COI tag; nobody could show any examples of how my involvement in the subject has caused any POV issues.
375:
339:
93:
1203:
791:
context; the program has interviewed Presidential candidates (Mitt Romney), governors, A-list pundits, and so on.
1015:
Google News Archive search results: 2 hits, one accessible -- is it a blog or a reliable source as defined by the
868:
However, I do not see any obvious POV or other problems with the article. Is there something I'm missing? Cheers,
27:
1196:
977:
The tag for a GUIDELINE about Conflict of Interest is ridiculous in this case. Reading and absorbing the full
587:
1170:
Closed as delete more for BLP reasons than notability; webpronews citation doesn't seem to have been a factor
169:
582:
526:
218:
137:
1195:
Hmm. Webpronews seems to carry a lot of press releases as well as original news items and commentary, and
902:
564:
499:
236:
711:
519:
20:
1234:
963:
862:
852:
809:
769:
754:
741:
719:
283:
189:
83:
666:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
383:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
299:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
773:
758:
98:
1283:
1256:
1238:
1210:
1187:
1044:
993:
967:
888:
872:
813:
777:
762:
745:
727:
470:
79:
1009:
650:
489:
1184:
1041:
885:
828:
576:
1280:
1271:. Problems with the criteria should be discussed at the criteria talkpage, but unless
1230:
959:
848:
805:
737:
715:
512:
422:
351:
333:
1098:
Closed as "keep" but later deleted. Discussion included several other weak references.
1292:
1276:
1137:
978:
1272:
1016:
990:
841:
505:
367:
296:
1150:
Closed as no consensus; webpronews was one of 4 references cited including cnn.com
447:
National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
1268:
634:
616:
558:
1227:
The "notability" criteria seem myopic in this case. See also my remarks above.
1181:
1038:
1020:
882:
824:
640:
357:
273:
267:
249:
663:
492:
1267:
I've restored the tags. I simply don't see evidence of notability per the
1004:
Google search results: just 196 unique hits I did not look at every one
662:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
1019:? It discusses both Time magazine's selection of the closely-related
946:
any of them). I question whether the tagging isn't itself POV-based.
861:) is the Mitch Berg mentioned in the article. Fair enough. (See also
880:
I tagged it mostly for people to keep an eye on it going forward. --
1160:
One of 8 references cited however others included major newspapers
380:
1275:
demonstrating notability are produced, the tag should stay. The
753:
is mosst certainly notable enough to warrant its own article.
212:
43:
15:
1122:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Barry Schwartz (technologist)
1199:
reads like a press release to me. So I wouldn't count it.
847:
tag to this article, presumably because frequent editor
1126:
Notability was established otherwise with other sources
1166:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Seth Finkelstein (2nd)
1118:
Articles citing webpronews.com that were not deleted:
188:
1136:
Closed as "delete"; later recreated as a redirect to
1204:
Google results for "Northern Alliance Radio Network"
379:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
295:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1055:Articles citing webpronews.com that were deleted:
1079:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/John La Tourrette
61:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1084:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Unlock Reality
202:
8:
1074:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Micropreneur
1059:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Ben Pfeiffer
1156:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Blackle.com
1064:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Soccergirl
611:
430:Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
408:
328:
244:
1094:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Lexipedia
229:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
1146:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Amapedia
1089:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Gothador
1069:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Gothador
932:tomorrow the show would likely carry on.
613:
330:
246:
1132:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Kopimi
1250:the "notability" criteria seem myopic
1052:Past uses of webpronews.com in AfDs:
656:This redirect is within the scope of
373:This redirect is within the scope of
289:This redirect is within the scope of
216:
7:
1299:Redirect-Class Conservatism articles
30:on 22 September 2020. The result of
1304:NA-importance Conservatism articles
443:Missing years and articles in radio
235:It is of interest to the following
51:for discussing improvements to the
734:Oops. Forgot about the signing...
309:Knowledge:WikiProject Conservatism
14:
1329:Redirect-Class Minnesota articles
1309:WikiProject Conservatism articles
1007:Google News search results: 1 hit
464:Unknown-importance Radio articles
312:Template:WikiProject Conservatism
1334:NA-importance Minnesota articles
643:
633:
615:
477:Radio articles needing attention
421:
360:
350:
332:
276:
266:
248:
217:
73:Click here to start a new topic.
19:
1030:Northern Alliance Radio Network
676:Knowledge:WikiProject Minnesota
53:Northern Alliance Radio Network
26:This article was nominated for
1140:, the sponsoring organization.
679:Template:WikiProject Minnesota
571:The History of Rock & Roll
552:Requests for Radio peer review
1:
1284:18:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
1257:08:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
1239:13:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
1202:I skimmed over the first 150
994:01:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
968:13:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
814:13:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
746:21:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
728:20:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
670:and see a list of open tasks.
387:and see a list of open tasks.
303:and see a list of open tasks.
70:Put new text under old text.
1319:NA-importance Radio articles
1211:13:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
1188:15:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
1045:15:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
889:15:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
873:14:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
865:on Mitchberg's talk page.)
393:Knowledge:WikiProject Radio
78:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1350:
1324:WikiProject Radio articles
778:05:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
763:05:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
396:Template:WikiProject Radio
628:
545:Collaboration of the Week
460:Unassessed Radio articles
407:
345:
261:
243:
108:Be welcoming to newcomers
1277:conflict of interest tag
588:Scott Mills (radio show)
292:WikiProject Conservatism
1314:NA-Class Radio articles
583:The Museum of Curiosity
903:Stadelheim Transmitter
381:Radio-related subjects
103:avoid personal attacks
819:Conflict of Interest?
659:WikiProject Minnesota
565:The Howard Stern Show
315:Conservatism articles
128:Neutral point of view
1017:Notability Guideline
133:No original research
837:) recently added a
284:Conservatism portal
682:Minnesota articles
231:content assessment
114:dispute resolution
75:
1011:
730:
714:comment added by
698:
697:
694:
693:
690:
689:
610:
609:
606:
605:
602:
601:
598:
597:
533:Unreferenced BLPs
376:WikiProject Radio
327:
326:
323:
322:
211:
210:
94:Assume good faith
71:
42:
41:
1341:
1273:reliable sources
1186:
1043:
1008:
887:
846:
840:
709:
684:
683:
680:
677:
674:
653:
651:Minnesota portal
648:
647:
646:
637:
630:
629:
619:
612:
490:Midweek Politics
436:Article requests
425:
418:
417:
409:
401:
400:
397:
394:
391:
370:
365:
364:
363:
354:
347:
346:
336:
329:
317:
316:
313:
310:
307:
286:
281:
280:
279:
270:
263:
262:
252:
245:
222:
221:
213:
207:
206:
192:
123:Article policies
44:
23:
16:
1349:
1348:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1289:
1288:
1180:
1037:
1026:Power Line blog
1001:
881:
844:
838:
821:
785:
703:
681:
678:
675:
672:
671:
649:
644:
642:
594:
577:American Top 40
398:
395:
392:
389:
388:
366:
361:
359:
314:
311:
308:
305:
304:
282:
277:
275:
149:
144:
143:
142:
119:
89:
12:
11:
5:
1347:
1345:
1337:
1336:
1331:
1326:
1321:
1316:
1311:
1306:
1301:
1291:
1290:
1287:
1286:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1246:
1228:
1224:
1223:
1219:
1218:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1110:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1091:
1086:
1081:
1076:
1071:
1066:
1061:
1034:
1033:
1013:
1005:
1000:
997:
975:
974:
973:
972:
971:
970:
952:
951:
950:
949:
948:
947:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
924:
923:
922:
921:
920:
919:
911:
910:
909:
908:
907:
906:
894:
893:
892:
891:
820:
817:
784:
781:
751:
749:
748:
735:
702:
699:
696:
695:
692:
691:
688:
687:
685:
668:the discussion
655:
654:
638:
626:
625:
620:
608:
607:
604:
603:
600:
599:
596:
595:
593:
592:
591:
590:
573:
568:
561:
549:
535:
522:
508:
495:
479:
466:
449:
429:
427:
426:
414:
413:
405:
404:
402:
399:Radio articles
385:the discussion
372:
371:
355:
343:
342:
337:
325:
324:
321:
320:
318:
301:the discussion
288:
287:
271:
259:
258:
253:
241:
240:
234:
223:
209:
208:
146:
145:
141:
140:
135:
130:
121:
120:
118:
117:
110:
105:
96:
90:
88:
87:
76:
67:
66:
63:
62:
56:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1346:
1335:
1332:
1330:
1327:
1325:
1322:
1320:
1317:
1315:
1312:
1310:
1307:
1305:
1302:
1300:
1297:
1296:
1294:
1285:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1265:
1258:
1255:
1251:
1248:I agree that
1247:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1221:
1220:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1209:
1205:
1200:
1198:
1189:
1185:
1183:
1178:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1164:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1144:
1139:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1130:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1120:
1119:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1097:
1096:
1095:
1092:
1090:
1087:
1085:
1082:
1080:
1077:
1075:
1072:
1070:
1067:
1065:
1062:
1060:
1057:
1056:
1054:
1053:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1040:
1031:
1027:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1006:
1003:
1002:
998:
996:
995:
992:
987:
983:
980:
969:
965:
961:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
917:
916:
915:
914:
913:
912:
904:
900:
899:
898:
897:
896:
895:
890:
886:
884:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
871:
866:
864:
860:
857:
854:
850:
843:
836:
833:
830:
826:
818:
816:
815:
811:
807:
803:
799:
795:
792:
788:
782:
780:
779:
775:
771:
765:
764:
760:
756:
747:
743:
739:
736:
733:
732:
731:
729:
725:
721:
717:
713:
706:
700:
686:
669:
665:
661:
660:
652:
641:
639:
636:
632:
631:
627:
624:
621:
618:
614:
589:
585:
584:
579:
578:
574:
572:
569:
567:
566:
562:
560:
557:
556:
554:
553:
547:
546:
542:
540:
536:
534:
531:
529:
528:
523:
521:
517:
515:
514:
509:
507:
504:
502:
501:
496:
494:
491:
488:
486:
485:
480:
478:
475:
473:
472:
467:
465:
461:
458:
456:
455:
450:
448:
444:
440:
438:
437:
432:
431:
428:
424:
420:
419:
416:
415:
411:
410:
406:
403:
386:
382:
378:
377:
369:
358:
356:
353:
349:
348:
344:
341:
338:
335:
331:
319:
302:
298:
294:
293:
285:
274:
272:
269:
265:
264:
260:
257:
254:
251:
247:
242:
238:
232:
228:
224:
220:
215:
214:
205:
201:
198:
195:
191:
187:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
155:
152:
151:Find sources:
148:
147:
139:
138:Verifiability
136:
134:
131:
129:
126:
125:
124:
115:
111:
109:
106:
104:
100:
97:
95:
92:
91:
85:
81:
80:Learn to edit
77:
74:
69:
68:
65:
64:
60:
54:
50:
46:
45:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1249:
1201:
1194:
1109:
1035:
1028:but not the
1012:-- blog post
988:
984:
976:
867:
863:this message
855:
831:
822:
804:
800:
796:
793:
789:
786:
766:
750:
707:
704:
701:Removed Tags
657:
581:
575:
563:
550:
543:
538:
537:
525:
524:
511:
510:
506:Portal:Radio
498:
497:
482:
481:
469:
468:
452:
451:
434:
433:
374:
368:Radio portal
306:Conservatism
297:conservatism
290:
256:Conservatism
237:WikiProjects
226:
199:
193:
185:
178:
172:
166:
160:
150:
122:
47:This is the
35:
999:Notability?
710:—Preceding
559:Rod Serling
520:Radio stubs
412:To-do List:
176:free images
59:not a forum
1293:Categories
1138:Piratbyrån
1021:Power Line
1281:Isotope23
1231:Mitchberg
1197:that item
960:Mitchberg
849:Mitchberg
806:Mitchberg
783:Summation
738:Mitchberg
716:Mitchberg
673:Minnesota
664:Minnesota
623:Minnesota
493:Bob Crane
116:if needed
99:Be polite
55:redirect.
49:talk page
1269:criteria
859:contribs
835:contribs
770:Prnd3825
755:Prnd3825
724:contribs
712:unsigned
518:Expand:
500:Maintain
441:Create:
227:redirect
84:get help
57:This is
36:redirect
28:deletion
1217:reason?
471:Cleanup
182:WP refs
170:scholar
991:Tony G
527:Verify
484:Expand
454:Assess
233:scale.
154:Google
1182:A. B.
1039:A. B.
883:A. B.
825:A. B.
823:User
539:Other
513:Stubs
390:Radio
340:Radio
225:This
197:JSTOR
158:books
112:Seek
1235:talk
964:talk
853:talk
829:talk
810:talk
774:talk
759:talk
742:talk
720:talk
190:FENS
164:news
101:and
34:was
1254:CWC
1208:CWC
979:COI
870:CWC
842:coi
555::
204:TWL
1295::
1237:)
1179:--
966:)
845:}}
839:{{
812:)
776:)
761:)
744:)
726:)
722:•
586:;
580:;
462:;
445:,
184:)
82:;
1233:(
1032:.
962:(
856:·
851:(
832:·
827:(
808:(
772:(
757:(
740:(
718:(
548::
541::
530::
516::
503::
487::
474::
457::
439::
239::
200:·
194:·
186:·
179:·
173:·
167:·
161:·
156:(
86:.
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
