Discussion:Roger Hicks
- Admissibilité
- Neutralité
- Droit d'auteur
- Article de qualité
- Bon article
- Lumière sur
- À faire
- Archives
- Commons
Cet article est indexé par les projets Australie et Rock.
Les projets ont pour but d’enrichir le contenu de Wikipédia en aidant à la coordination du travail des contributeurs. Vous pouvez modifier directement cet article ou visiter les pages de projets pour prendre conseil ou consulter la liste des tâches et des objectifs.
| Avancement | Importance | pour le projet | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ébauche | À évaluer |  | Australie (discussion • critères • liste • stats • hist. • comité • stats vues) |
 | Rock (discussion • critères • liste • stats • hist. • comité • stats vues) | ||
Cet article ne comporte pas de liste de tâches suggérées. Vous pouvez saisir une liste de tâches à accomplir (par exemple sous forme d'une liste à puces), puis sauvegarder. Vous pouvez aussi consulter la page d'aide.
Recent edit (4 June, 2022).
modifierHallo.
First of all, I'm sorry to have to write in English, because I do not know French. This may account for me not taking notice of the message you referred to about the lack of references.
I want to explain about the edit I made a short time ago.
I am sorry that I cause you to react as strongly as seeming indecent, and I probably did make an error of judgement.
The reason I made the edit is that I know the subject of this article, Roger Hicks, and he asked me to make the changes, because he was probably aware that editing one's own article may violate the neutral point of view (although it is not prohibited), and so he thought it would be better if I did it, as I have no stake in the matter either way, no vested interests, no conflict of interest. Also, he doesn't know the workings of Wikipedia nearly as well as I do. He sent me the exact text to insert, which is mostly the same as what was there (and is again now), but he thought a few details he considered inaccurate needed to be updated.
These details he changed would be correct, as he would know his own life better than anyone else. I've written back to tell him what happened, and told him he'll need to supply references before I try again. If he can supply them, I understand it will then be all right to post the amended text again.
Again, I'm sorry I have annoyed or offended you by doing this. It was not intended, and I have a good Wikipedia record - but clearly I made an error of judgement this time.
If Roger can supply me the references to support anything he changed, would I be permitted then to edit the article again?
Thank you.
Regards, Michael Edwards. M.J.E. (discuter) 4 juin 2022 à 01:22 (CEST)