I do not know what happened. I must have thought I was 'undoing' something else. I have no, and could have no, objection. Syek88 ( talk ) 02:57, (UTC) It's difficult for me to believe that an undo edit and writing 22 letters in the edit summary stopping pr whitewashing all can be a mistake. And whether it was a mistake or not I don't see such an edit as "innocent". oldnewnew ( talk ) 03:08, (UTC) we'll I won't try to defend my own intentions; you are the one who has persistently dodged questions about whether you are being paid to be here (credit to you though for not denying it when. Be that as it may, i would be happy to re-insert it myself when the article becomes unbarred. For full disclosure, my only connection to this article is that i own an overly percussive yamaha upright.
All, my, sons, summary
And according to talk:Steinway sons/GA1 "The article itself is close to being a "GA" and the article already had a "Is it neutral? Fair representation without bias ". And the critical/negative"s that syek88 recently has spread different places over the article turns the article from being encyclopedical (based on facts) to just a collection of"s representing one view. That concerns my, shredder especially because the article was already categorized as neutral before syek88 added"s representing only one view. Another problem is that syek88 doesn't follow the wikipedia:Manual of Style 100 and i know that following the manual of Style is an important part of being. Best, Oldnewnew ( talk ) 02:38, (UTC) I deleted the diana Krall" because you had only put it in there to offset the michael kieran Harvey", on which i am willing to concede. I had expected that it would not be disputed. Syek88 ( talk ) 02:43, (UTC) That's a lie. I asked you about this edit that clearly has nothing to do with diana Krall or Michael kieran Harvey's very unencyclopedic" about suicide. Oldnewnew ( talk ) 02:49, (UTC) i am sorry. That was a mistake, innocent I can assure you.
Ignoring them is what 'unballances' (sic). Syek88 ( talk ) 02:11, (UTC) npov also requires that all positions be fairly represented as well. I won't comment on whether the gan is a paid venture. Epic Genius ( talk ) 02:15, (UTC) Of course they should. If there are contrary views, insert them. Their absence doesn't justify removing the de Ocampo and Fostle views. Syek88 ( talk ) 02:18, margaret (UTC) syek88: so how do you explain and justify this edit by you, where you deleted contrary views?: i would very much like to hear that - especially after having read your comment just above! oldnewnew ( talk ) 02:41, (UTC) Epic Genius: Yes, and when waiting for the ga review I was keeping an eye on the article.
So stop telling that the"s are from "highly qualified historians and musicologists because that is entry not the issue. And by the way, david liebeskind is an actual marketing expert so he overrules the "highly qualified historians and musicologists" statements about Steinway marketing. Best, Oldnewnew ( talk ) 02:00, (UTC) I concur with Oldnewnew's observation above. Also, some positive"s can be added. Epic Genius ( talk ) 02:02, (UTC) And since this article is up for ga review, it's not a good idea to have either edit warring or pov-laden text. Epic Genius ( talk ) 02:02, (UTC) Getting the article to ga status is part of the terms of payment, i suspect. As for balance: balance does not require 50/50. It requires that the views of experts be fairly represented. De ocampo and Fostle are not marketing experts but they are experts in telling us about the consequences of Steinway's marketing in the musical world and industry.
Syek88 ( talk ) 01:46, (UTC) I think some contradictory"s, if there are any, should be inserted. Incidentally, calling other editors pr people is not generally accepted unless the user publicly declares it on wikimedia sites. Epic Genius ( talk ) 01:58, (UTC) syek88 you don't understand. The problem is not the" itself. The problem is an overly representation of critical/negative"s. If you look at the articles about songs - and they are written in accordance with wikipedia policy - you will find articles with a factual description of the song, and then afterwards"s representing different views/opinions by various experts. An article with 40 factual description of a song and then 60 critical/negative"s about the song is obviously unballanced. So is the Steinway artists section.
Summary of, all, my, sons by Arthur Miller
Best, Oldnewnew ( talk ) 01:22, (UTC) I'm thinking that only the facts and should be presented here;. No opinions for now. Any peacock sources and opinionated sources should also be removed. Epic Genius ( talk ) 01:25, (UTC) Articles about songs have"s from critics. So do articles about books. A corporation should be no different. Facts need context; the"s provide.
These are"s from highly qualified historians and musicologists. You are unwittingly abetting a whitewash by a paid corporate shill. Syek88 ( talk ) 01:30, (UTC) I came to this article only because of the pov tag. So i went to remove the specific issue. Are there other"s that should be added? Epic Genius ( talk ) 01:39, (UTC) The tag was wrongly placed as a pr whitewash. If there are contradictory"s - i haven't seen any - then they should be inserted.
The last two paragraphs are critical opinions"s. This makes the whole section very unbalanced, because the section contains mostly negative opinions and almost no positive opinions about the subject. Another problem is that this article should be encyclopedically (as the article is part of an encyclopedia which means that it should be based on facts. The opinions are not facts but opinions. Over half of the whole section is just a collection of opinions"s from various persons.
And contrary to syek88 I don't think that authors/experts statements are holy. (And I don't see any author/expert as a "top independent account. I can easily do as syek88 does and write an article about Barack Obama and use here, so that we can compare a bunch of published sources and determine the proper balance for the article. Only reliable critical"s about Obama. And I can also write an article about Obama with only reliable positive"s about him. Both articles would be very unballanced, also if i used "top independent accounts" as references. The Steinway artists section has"s that are all criticizing the artist program so the section is very unballanced. I added the template to request just a little more balance.
Book - crawley - wiley online library
I hop to have resumes it soon. Syek88 ( talk ) 00:59, (UTC) over half of the section about Steinway artists is critical opinions"s about the Steinway artist program. The other half is a factual description of the program. Therefore, the section is not balanced as it should be, per WP:balance and WP:balasps. More detailed: pdf The section has four paragraphs. The first two paragraphs are about the history of the Steinway artist program and some facts about the program,. Number of artists, examples of artists, and.
I'll leave a message on the talk design page of User:Dschwen, the creator of the miniAtlas, to alert him to the odd behavior. I'm closing this request, however, since there is nothing wrong with the coordinates themselves. Deor ( talk ) 18:14, (UTC)Quick answer: the wma centers and zooms onto the highlighted polygon data. I'll see if I can make this a bit smarter. dschwen 20:51, (UTC) Generally negative depiction of the artist program edit i see an edit war developing over how to portray the artist program. I've seen a number of sources describing it as aggressive and even vindictive against artists who select non-Steinway pianos. If you want to support a different viewpoint you should discuss the sources Binksternet ( talk ) 00:55, (UTC) Well put. There is no basis for the whitewash of the "number of sources" you point out. I have ordered from the library a copy of Donald Fostle's company history, which is the top independent account and which this article almost completely ignores.
article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Contents coordinate error edit geodata-check The following coordinate fixes are needed for Hamburg geolocation links to a map of queens, nyc — specifico talk 14:16, (UTC) @ specifico : I'm not seeing that. The coordinates below "Hamburg, germany" in the infobox are those of the Steinway building on Rondenbarg in Hamburg, and I don't see any other Hamburg coordinates in the article. Could you be more specific about the location of the supposed error? Deor ( talk ) 16:51, (UTC) Hello. The coordinates seem ok but the link shows a map of the queens, ny location. Did you try the link? Specifico talk 17:12, (UTC) Hmm, that seems to be a problem with the wikiminiAtlas rather than with the coordinates or with wikipedia itself.
B-class on parts the project's quality scale. Mid, this article has been rated. Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope. Wikiproject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on wikipedia. Low, this article has been rated. Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Reed tieri Article author
Steinway sons was a, music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they friend believe there was a mistake. This article is of interest to the following. Wikiprojects : This article is within the scope. Wikiproject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. B, this article has been rated.