Jump to content

Talk:Alexander Cornell du Houx

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stalking Charges

[edit]

Just returning to Wikipedia, but noticed that the same person keeps removing the section on stalking charges from this entry (using BLP), even though these entries cite public news articles. I revised to cite two articles and made it a little shorter than the original, but think this is important to leave in. It's largely why his name is known nationally. Rainbowsprinkles (talk) 03:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stalking Charges Unfounded Allegations

[edit]

Recent changes have been reverted, again. Please see: "Removing all or significant parts of a page's content without any reason" http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism#Warnings Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 06:17, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My reasoning for editing was to fix the flow of the article and match more of the biographical pages on wiki/make it neutral. IMHO copying and pasting from the candidates website isn't very neutral. Further, I cited newspaper articles, often paraphrasing or quoting directly from public sources. It is not vandalism - I did cite the charges as alleged and that the order was removed. Further, I think we may have a COI issue here ... Rainbowsprinkles (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a way forward - I'm happy to paraphrase the current content, but don't think it makes sense the way it is now (without delineating markers). As for the last section that you deleted, I can put in actual quotations from the articles if that is more acceptable. Again, these are publicly sourced articles available via AP and online outlets. I do think there's some language we can negotiate to make this more neutral. Rainbowsprinkles (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major problems with this article

[edit]

Wikipedia has rules which are being broken right and left in this article: please see WP:RS, WP:V, WP:NEUTRAL. Please rework this article to comply with Wikipedia's standards else it will be either reduced substantially or else proposed for deletion, thank you.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unsourced BLP - I've stubbed it. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recommending removal of Alex Cornell du Houx's Wikipedia page.

[edit]

Newspapers nationwide (USA Today, for example) actually took down their articles based on the Bangor Daily News article (recently cited as a source of allegations), when on May 14th the temporary order was dismissed and withdrawn in the Belfast, Maine, court. The State Police never interviewed Cornell du Houx; their investigation ended on the afternoon of May 11, 2012, as reported on by the Portland Press Herald (not cited in recent unbalanced changes). Rep. Cornell du Houx has no record of any wrongdoing in any court anywhere in America or elsewhere. That fact has been verified by the U.S Navy for his job. Cornell du Houx's main contribution nationally is his leadership in Operation Free, rallying veterans for climate change with the support of the Department of Defense. Cornell du Houx has been under sustained and often libelous attack by political enemies in a highly charged media environment. (The Sun Journal, for example, had to change their false headline recently.) I am going to undo the unbalanced changes to his Wikipedia page, but more detractors keep showing up to try to discredit him here. Who has the time for this? I doubt that this kind of sustained personal and political effort against a public servant is something Wikipedia can control. A brief check of the repeated attempts to make hay of allegations where articles written in a media frenzy are used without context makes it clear that this will continue. (Even my Talk edit level 3 template warning has been partially deleted and changed.) I recommend that Alexander Cornell du Houx's page be taken down altogether; he has plenty of media already setting the record straight. There are sources for everything stated by me here on his Talk page. But the encyclopedia is no place to distort a person's record by filling space trading words over allegations in a dismissed Temporary Protection Order that the media would not normally give any space to, as TPOs are one-sided by nature, and almost always given on request. (As a matter of procedure, Erin Herbig, Cornell du Houx' fiancée at the time, never bothered to call the police.) Anyway, Wikipedia is no place for tabloid politics. (If Alex's detractors used their real names here, it would provide further evidence.) Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 17:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Concluding comment posted and revised during "edit conflict": Alex Cornell du Houx’s Wikipedia page was created using the national media attention given to local grass-roots disputes in Maine, after the Bangor Daily News listed allegations contained in a local Temporary Protection Order. The TPO was withdrawn, and the article was removed from newspapers nationwide. The Bangor Daily article could possibly be considered libelous. There is no reason for this local dispute to be in Wikipedia. The work that Alex Cornell du Houx has preformed on the national stage was valuable but not really encyclopedic. Reference to his national work was removed from Wikipedia by editors while I was learning to do citation. The main reason given in Talk above for this Wikipedia page, that these “stalking charges” (there are no charges, only allegations) are “largely why his name is known nationally,” is demonstrably untrue. But there is really no reason for this to be a page on Wikipedia at all. The fixation of some editors on this local issue is evidence of bias. (This post is germane to the issue, so please do not edit it. I have copies.) NB: The edit of Rainbowsprinkles, 20:33, 27 June 2012, adds to the case that there is no resolution and no need for this Wikipedia page. This is a small-time issue and has no place here in the spirit in Wikipedia.) Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 21:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So you are not denying the COI? Please do not delete sourced material. As the father of the article's subject, you are not exactly neutral. The articles on the Bangor Daily News and other Maine daily papers remain up and syndicated via AP. You have a major conflict of interest on this page. Just because you do not agree with the content, doesn't mean the page should be deleted. Ostensibly, when you posted material from his website (against wikipedia's guidelines for neutrality) you did not want it deleted. Rainbowsprinkles (talk) 20:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Rainbowsprinkles.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 21:34, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, therefore, the page looks fair and balanced to you now? Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 22:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can make the section you deleted before shorter - it's from an older version that Namiba added in when the article was longer. I don't think we should delete the entire section though. Rainbowsprinkles (talk) 22:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again I find myself agreing with Rainbowsprinkles.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have collapsed the paragraph. The instance merited discussion but undue weight was being given to the topic as is shown by it eclipsing the rest of the content in an article about a state senator. I have also removed the COI template as I believe that the content of the article is free of any WP:NPOV issues that are produced with a WP:COI. I also removed the {{unsourced}} template as it no longer applies.

Unless anyone has a valid argument (preferably backed up by applicable WP policies or guidelines) as to why the articles current content must change, I consider this issue resolved. OlYeller21Talktome 14:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Namiba is back, exhibiting same narrow bias, focusing on local party politics, disregarding OlYeller21's advice. This is an encyclopedia, not a blog. What to do? Btw, the police ended their investigation and Rep. Cornell du Houx was exonerated prior to the agreement with Herbig: "An investigation into the claims was opened by the Maine State Police, but the investigation was closed on May 11 before the pair reached an agreement later that evening." The police never even saw the need to interview Alex Cornell du Houx. This is still a country where one is presumed innocent. Wikipedia is clearly being misused by some editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Cornell du Houx (talk • contribs) 17:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC) Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 19:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Paul Cornell du Houx, I'd ask that you read this policy before commenting again. You are in serious violation of it and are acting uncivil.--TM 20:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let the community judge who is being "lynched." How about adding something positive about all accomplishments of this lawmaker. The motivation for creating Alexander Cornell du Houx's page is clearer all the time. I still believe that whoever authorized the page should de-authorize it, if possible. Many people believe that Wikipedia should not allow the moral authority of an encyclopedia to be used for entries about living politicians. I think we have a good example of a possible weakness in an otherwise wonderful concept for the dissemination of information here. Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 21:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS This should end it. Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Politics is a messy business, and sometimes it carries over into Wikipedia. To the best extent possible, Wikipedians try to be WP:NEUTRAL and balanced but it is possible that partisans will misuse the freedom here and paint a one-sided picture; if this happens please alert us and be specific and we will try our best to be neutral -- I'll try to be neutral and I believe most of the others here agree with me. And, I would think getting out of politics is a good thing. And the decision not to run for reelection was not caused by anything written here in Wikipedia -- rather, it is people in the political process itself. And as an American I am grateful that we have such excellent men and women serving in the armed services.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BLPN thread on Alexander Cornell du Houx

[edit]

There is currently an active discussion thread at the biographies of living persons noticeboard (BLPN) regarding the content of this article. The discussion was referred to that forum from the conflict of interest noticeboard. Issues of both biographical content and conflict of interest have appeared in discussions above, and this is to notify any interested contributors of the ongoing discussion at WP:BLPN, as it may prompt edits to this article. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 05:41, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another pass

[edit]

I stumbled on this page due to a coincidental overlap at another editor's talk page. It was the "Local issue not encyclopedic" headline at the other talk page which first drew my interest. I had encountered sort of that language back in March around the Bradford West by-election, 2012. I see now that, in the Bradford West case, the losing (never elected) local Labour candidate's Wiki page, to which I'd contributed a bit, has since been removed as others were recommending then. (The "language" I mentioned above, thus, is no longer available to refer in detail to.) I'm hoping, now, that the essence of what was in the candidate's page, including what I added, is incorporated in the by-election page. I may go back to check.

The COI exchange around the Cornell du Houx article also drew my attention and I reviewed that rather cursorily.

My short comment here was going to be "if it's [in Wiki] it can't be 'local[/off-limits]' I don't think". I hope my "fleshing out" in the Cornell du Houx article is a positive contribution. I'm open to discussion of course. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 20:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having now also scanned the above Deletion discussion, I will say I would not be in favor of deleting the article (it's a settled issue, it seems; I add my opinion for what it's worth). Accordingly, I would remove the "if" from my comment above: The article seems appropriately in Wiki. I've edited accordingly. I'm open to discussion. Cheers, again. Swliv (talk) 20:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This issue was checked as resolved in the biographies of living persons noticeboard (BLPN). There seems to be circular reasoning in "if it's [in Wiki] it can't be 'local[/off-limits]'. The page looks unbalanced again. Please revert. Cheers. Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 05:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday in the Bangor Daily News and today in The Forecaster (soon to appear in other local papers in Maine) the "agreement" between Cornell du Houx and Herbig (leaked to the Bangor Daily) was made news, and Cornell du Houx has therefore been able to provide the press with the numerous text messages, photos and emails (now that the leaked agreement has been confirmed by Herbig's lawyer to the BDN) that "show that he was not stalking or harassing Herbig." The Forecaster article says "Cornell du Houx also maintained that there were 17 different 'lies' in Herbig's request for protection." So this is a tempest in a teacup. Some Mainers feel that this is tabloid stuff at the level of local gossip. Cornell du Houx has presented hard evidence to clear his name. Lets not judge him here with an unbalanced encyclopedia page. And like it says in the press, let's move on from this issue, which was already resolved anyway. Paul Cornell du Houx (talk) 16:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

[edit]

Please stop the edit warring that is currently happening. Discuss here if needed. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to assume good faith, but to have two brand new accounts make the same exact edits on this article is hard to believe. How can we be sure there is not any sock puppetry involved? The person behind this article and his family have already admitted to making very similar edits as the two new editors.--TM 17:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One of them undid my most recent edit and told me Please see citations; facts not "point of view.. I think it needs to be protected for now. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please no mind games, and second guessing motivation. Alex Cornell du Houx has thousands of Facebook friends. He also has the US Navy's highest security clearance for his job as a public relations officer. As for questioning motivation, I might ask "why create this page if we don't want an encyclopedic biographical record?" Now we have one; let's let the facts and references speak for themselves and leave it at that. Keep it professional. Otherwise it would be more appropriate to open up a blog elsewhere. Thank you. Fin108 (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, keep it professional. Please tell me you're not advertising here. You sound like a PR spokesperson. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Really interested in who is editing with a pseudonym? Please adhere to the rules of conduct: "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on the content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter editors." This is about the facts, not the editors, just the facts, a profile worthy of an encyclopedia. Fin108 (talk) 20:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, I have other things to do. I haven't edited for 9yrs to be told that I'm editing for someone. What I smell here is a CoI issue and I am going to ask an admin to look into this. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am shocked - shocked! - to discover that so much promotional bullshit (and copyright violations) about a Maine politician and Navy officer have been added by anonymous editors who geolocate to Maine and the Navy. It's a remarkable coïncidence. bobrayner (talk) 23:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Alexander Cornell du Houx. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alexander Cornell du Houx. 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:

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) 22:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_Cornell_du_Houx&oldid=1199396608"