Talk:Thought leader/Archives/2016

"Freedom Outpost" blog and WP:FRINGE

I have removed a citation to this blog post on a website called "Freedom Outpost." There is absolutely no indication that either the "Freedom Outpost" site or the author is a noteworthy commentator or a source of useful information on this subject. The author's bio page identifies her as an artist ("I write for several blogs and also sell paintings"). There is no indication that this author has any expertise whatsoever in psychology, leadership or organization studies, sociology, or the like. Nor is there any indication that the author has ever written for or published in a mainstream publication.

Moreover, the site itself is a kook/fringe blog. There is no clear editorial control. The site publishes pieces (to take a few all written by this same author) that call Nelson Mandela a "terrorist" (here), promote Agenda 21 and other conspiracy theories (here, here, and here), advance climate change denial (here) and so forth.

This is a classic WP:FRINGE commentary and it belongs nowhere near this encyclopedia article. Neutrality^talk 21:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Ad hominem on the source without addressing the content removed: Orwell connotation. As it's just a reference complaint, will revert & add better source tag. Lexlex (talk) 21:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

That's completely, 100% wrong.

"Ad hominem on the source" makes no sense at all. This is a question of expertise and reliability, which this blogspam that you insist on pushing completely lacks. The bottom lines is that this is not a reliable source for the reasons I detailed above.

I have found some actual well-sourced content that criticizes the "thought leader" concept (from Forbes, the Harvard Business Review Ideacast, and commentatory from business scholars in the Financial Times) and inserted that into the article while removing the blog nonsense.

If this "Freedom Outpost" nonsense is restored again, I fully plan on taking this to the noticeboards. Neutrality^talk 00:42, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I added a better source tag and assumed we would wait for other editors to catch up. Deleting content and sources you don't like and then threatening me because you don't like that I'm following well-established procedure is very odd given your substantial edit history. Tag an article/reference with a date and wait for some answers, or fix a reference yourself. You're attacking a source and deleting everything without discussion or consensus. Note that multiple people using the same account is strongly discouraged. Am I dealing with one person here? Lexlex (talk) 07:38, 4 August 2016 (UTC)