https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vernon_Coleman#Proposed_New_Lede.
#IABATO @IABATO2 @JoeBlob20 @financialeyes @DavidGolemXIV @Pathos14658352 @GrubStreetJorno @Lloyd__Evans #EyesonTheMoney #ConquestofDough
I have taken out some time to do some admin. Admin of the on line life. Gravatar is a good way to do it and I will be doing some updating to mine later. https://en.gravatar.com/rogerglewis
Pulling together the past 11 years work here in Sweden as my new UK Business prepares for Take off.
https://www.yumpu.com/s/NzfcTyM6A3SHUXWJ
Roger G Lewis 2 April 2021 Wikipedia ontology, epistemology, civility WP:NPOV, #4Pamphlateers #IABATO https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/65426616/wikipedia-on-trial-neither-rhyme-nor-reason-can-express-wpnpov @JoeBlob20 @financialeyes @wiki_ballot @Pathos14658352 @DavidGolemXIV @scientificecon @CultStateDotCom @jbhearn @Lloyd__Evans @delbigtree @ClarkeMicah @wesfree #VernonColeman https://twitter.com/wiki_ballot/status/1375718967352918016 https://therealslog.com/2021/03/24/slog-special-investigation-astrazeneca-the-reality/ https://londonconversation.com/news/murdoch-backs-hancock-ov
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vernon_Coleman
Very sorry to hear that Vernon Coleman will not be making more videos.https://t.co/x0M9KvDO3U
— David Scott (@Albion_Rover) April 2, 2021
== Proposed New Lede. ==
Here is a ”’re draft of the lede”’. with some citations as to suggested good practice in Lede writing.
Vernon Coleman (born 18 May 1946) is an English blogger and novelist who writes on topics related to human health, politics and animal issues.He was formerly a newspaper columnist , and general practitioner (GP)( British Medical Doctor). Originally coming to prominence as the original TV doctor in the UK. https://vetapedia.se/vernon-coleman/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vernon_Coleman_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RogerGLewis#Stop_Mentioning_Me. Dr Coleman again came to prominence during the 2020 Pandemic after publishing a video on youtubehttps://brandnewtube.com/watch/coronavirus-scare-the-hoax-of-the-century-by-dr-vernon-coleman_bMpSodWOOaI8mYz.html https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2021/03/26/wikipedia-encyclopedia-or-the-new-reuters/https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/65411109/wikipedia-why-it-matters-and-how-to-participatedrs-prescription-from-dr-vernon-colemanhttps://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/65408784/a-drs-note-for-jimbo-from-dr-vernon-coleman-novel-edititus-wikipedius-bias-21
https://www.yumpu.com/s/UC9YjKoRyz3QdaJv which provoked criticism that he was a conspiracy theorist ”'(DIF =>)”’ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vernon_Coleman&diff=next&oldid=946494956, anti-vaccination activist, and AIDS denialist.
”’New proposed lede ends.”’
:I realise that this page is contentious and have read the Archives and studied the difs, The article needs a comprehensive re-write although a good start would be to replace the Lead(Lede)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_lede with a properly sourced encyclopedic Lede according to Wikipedia Lede writing guidance.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_create_and_manage_a_good_lead_section#Rule_of_thumbhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_paragraph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section.The last discussion for article deletion did not result in a consensus , but some cogent points were made pertinent to the current stale mate.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vernon_Coleman/Archive_1 did not reach a consensus but issues were discussed cogent to the Draft Re Written Lede above and other attempts to edit the article since that discussion have been curt and resulted in stale-mate.I am seeking help from the much more experienced volunteer community of regular editors, to initiate a consensus of that as yet to be realised Consensus debate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#In_talk_pages.I am a casual editor of Wikipedia but have taken the time to study this process on this page in depth as I am currently coding a collaborative design application which uses semantic and ontological algorithms to mine data and offer consensus solutions to affordable housing community design, as such: I have as much time as is needed to do the grunt work on this. [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] ([[User talk:RogerGLewis|talk]]) 06:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
:As the lead is supposed to be a short summary of the salient points in the body text, dont you think you should look at the body first? You should also put refs in the body, rather than your reference bombed lead, which is normally not acceptable. I think that the main point for you to consider is that the need for a change to the lead has certainly not been established. -[[User:Roxy the dog|”’Roxy”’ the sycamore.]] [[User talk:Roxy the dog|”’wooF”’]] 07:08, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
::Thank you Roxy the dog. 1. ”’don’t you think you should look at the body first?”’ I have looked at the body of the article and yes it needs attention 2. ”’The referencing approach”’ I have adopted is an attempt to encompass what is a sprawling array of diffs across several archived talk pages and also the deletion discussion. As I am not competent in citing diffs ( I am looking at how to do it properly later)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_diff_and_link_guide I felt that the Reference magazines I have made for my own use, and which i have published and linked to,allow me to add in the references properly in due course, without duplicating my own efforts or increasing the required effort of editors interested in the improvement of the article. 3. ”’Is the argument for the Lede to be re-written established?”’. There was no consensus in the deletion discussion,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vernon_Coleman_(2nd_nomination) (”’User:bibliomaniac15”’15 April 2020 (UTC)) that was some time ago. A properly sourced consensus process would answer that question, there is more than enough evidence to suggest that there is sufficient doubt as to the standard of the Article and of the Lede to approach the matter, as potentially controversial.[[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] ([[User talk:RogerGLewis|talk]]) 08:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
::: I have posted this notice to the Biography of Living persons Talk page (”’Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard”’) [[Vernon Coleman]] This article has been the subject of a deletion discussion in april 2020 and there are several archives of Talk page discussion. I have proposed a rewrite of the lead (Lede) , the main body of the article also requires attention to return it to an encyclopedic standard.
I have added a proposed new Lede on the talk page, and I am seeking assistance from the wider editor community to address the current problems in the entry. ~~~~
[[Vernon Coleman]] This article has been the subject of a deletion discussion in april 2020 and there are several archives of Talk page discussion. I have proposed a rewrite of the lead (Lede) , the main body of the article also requires attention to return it to an encyclopedic standard.
I have added a proposed new Lede on the talk page, and I am seeking assistance from the wider editor community to address the current problems in the entry. [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] ([[User talk:RogerGLewis|talk]]) 08:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
I don’t really know where to post because this talk page is a mess, so I guess I’ll just go to the end of the last section. I do see that he’s labeled an anti-vaccine activist with no mention of that in the article body, and while it seems pretty likely that is true it should be supported by the body text. I’m not terribly fond of how the lead is written now because it splits up the “conspiracy theorist, activist” stuff from the “His medical claims are widely considered to be crap” line. Maybe something along the lines of {{tq|Vernon Coleman is an English writer and blogger who writes on topics related to human health, animal welfare and politics. He was formerly a general practitioner and newspaper columnist. He is most notable for his AIDS denialism, pseudoscientific medicine and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Coleman’s medical claims have been widely discredited and described as pseudoscientific.}} That groups the “He is a this that did that” together and then groups the “General consensus is he makes very bad medical claims” together. I think we need to stipulate the COVID-19 conspiracy theories, since that is how the sources we’re citing frame it. I changed the verbiage on the anti-vaccination to pseudoscientific medicine because there’s no mention of vaccines in the body, and there is plenty of mention of pseudoscience. Obviously this is just a rough hack at it, but hopefully it can lead towards getting something everyone can agree on. [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 11:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
:That would be a massive improvement in my opinion (”’ScottishFinnishRadish”’) I would vote for your amendments set out in green. Regarding the larger re-write, with a more balanced lede as per your suggestion, and {{tq|that Draft}}, I think it would be somewhat less critical. [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] ([[User talk:RogerGLewis|talk]]) 13:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
:Support text proposed by [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]]. Definitely seems like a huge improvement though “discredited and described as pseudoscientific” sounds redundant. I might pick one or the other for the lead. It looks like he authored [https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/20524004-anyone-who-tells-you-vaccines-are-safe-and-effective-is-lying-here-s-th Anyone Who Tells You Vaccines Are Safe and Effective Is Lying] and was [https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/mar/31/facebook-posts/no-covid-19-vaccines-are-not-weapons-mass-destruct/ fact checked] on the subject in PolitiFact so the anti-vaccination part would appear accurate though this needs to be developed in the body with supporting citations before making it to the lead. – [[User:Wikmoz|Wikmoz]] ([[User talk:Wikmoz|talk]]) 22:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- ::Disagree with all text proposed by [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] due to clear malicious intent. A consensus on the lede was reached until [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] suggested a highly redacted suggestion from an very old edition of the page (which was favorable to Coleman) which referenced only the “true” information in praise of Coleman’s works. I also have evidence here which shows [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] is purposefully suggesting sources which are in no-way impartial. I say this because the “Yumpu” is a copy-paste of Wikipedia articles, “Vetapedia” (a blog) claims Wikipedia is trying to “disfame (Colemans) reputation” and finally ”'”NotTheGrubStreetJournal” is (according to the about me page) [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]]’s personal blog where RogerGLewis has [https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2021/04/01/taking-the-lead-in-a-ship-of-april-fools-amending-the-lede-no-greater-passion-than-the-passion-to-alter-someone-elses-draft/ written favorably on Coleman’s view that “Wikipedia is a prophylactic (weapon) against thought crime”] “.”’ All these sites claim Wikipedia and its editors are malicious actors and then link to a video of Coleman criticizing Wikipedia. Third; Coleman did ”not” come to prominence in 2020, because sources going back to the 1980’s demonstrate his notoriety. I instead suspect what may have come to prominence was [[RogerGLewis]]’s knowledge of Coleman in 2020 and a then Roger himself desired to have Wikipedia align with Coleman’s biased views. Suddenly linking to Coleman’s ‘BrandNewTube’ after he was banned from YouTube is effectively free advertising for Coleman, something which he has instructed his viewers to do via his videos, multiple times. In short, changing the lede this significantly strikes me as attempting to push a particular POV which is not the purpose of Wikipedia, RogerGLewis is not acting impartially, however I am however in favour of adding a category outlining how Coleman’s works have been criticised by independent bodies regarding his spread of [[COVID-19 misinformation|COVID-19 misinformation]] [[User:MrEarlGray|MrEarlGray]] ([[User talk:MrEarlGray|talk]]) 00:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- :::Is the consensus version that you refer to the currently [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vernon_Coleman&oldid=1015522618 live version] or something else? – [[User:Wikmoz|Wikmoz]] ([[User talk:Wikmoz|talk]]) 01:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- ::::The consensus version I refer to is the current live version. [[User:MrEarlGray|MrEarlGray]] ([[User talk:MrEarlGray|talk]]) 01:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- :::::The text proposed by ScottishFinnishRadish is very similar to the current live version. It just omits the critical elements from the first sentence. Dives head first into them in the third sentence. Your objection is that the criticism doesn’t appear until the third sentence? – [[User:Wikmoz|Wikmoz]] ([[User talk:Wikmoz|talk]]) 03:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Phew, I thought it was what I wrote! [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 00:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
:: I support The text proposed by ScottishFinnishRadish, {{tq|this Draft in “green”}} the ordering of the sentence is much more balanced in my opinion.
{{tq|”'”Vernon Coleman is an English writer and blogger who writes on topics related to human health, animal welfare and politics. He was formerly a general practitioner and newspaper columnist. He is most notable for his AIDS denialism, pseudoscientific medicine and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. Coleman’s medical claims have been widely discredited and described as pseudoscientific”.”’}}
ScottishFinnishRadish , Wikmoz & [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] all agree it seems. Regarding consensus the current lead does not have consensus, the last discussion was truncated as I was blocked from editing and the request I made for posting the discussion to appropriate notice boards was ignored.I posted a notice at (”’Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard”’)[[Vernon Coleman]]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Vernon_Coleman which seems to have attracted some interest. I believe that a number of archived discussion participants would cetainly disagree that a proper consensus had been reached on the article as it currently stands and other notices should be posted to relevant editor Boards, I do not wish to canvas and must for the record reject MrEarlGray’s allegations of [[COVID-19 misinformation|COVID-19 misinformation]] I am editing in good faith and have no fealty to or with Dr Vernon Coleman. [[User:RogerGLewis|RogerGLewis]] ([[User talk:RogerGLewis|talk]]) 09:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
