This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This Apple Records/Apple Corps-related article is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Wikipedia. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles
Other :Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.
This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?
libels are supposed to be omitted, aren't they?
the referenced NYTimes' article writes:
"Editors' Note: March 4, 2010
... the article did not accuse Mr. Mardas of engaging in fraudulent dealings or criminality, either then or at any subsequent time. "
Nothing about "are contesting the allegations and will report the result"
Or am i not reading well?
(It is Athens, but not Mardas, is this not allowed?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.249.61.130 (talk) 09:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Negative Theme in Article?
We can appreciate that a Summary is meant to be a simplified and shortened version of the full text, but begs the question does the content of the summary also need to suffer from 'Over-Simplification' too? The oversimplification used here has painted the Magic Alex character in a somewhat negative light. i.e. "The bullet proof cars were not 'bullet proof'. " One might speculate that that armouring would had been adequate enough against attackers, so long as they were not using fresh armed forces rounds and knew exactly where to aim for.
My Point? Why are we latching on to so many negative aspects and then summarising them? In fact the whole article seems to had become negative. Can we give the man a break and get a more balanced view ? Don't forget English is not Mr. Mardas' first language, so the lack of being able to express himself fully over the years must had had some effect on being able to have his side of the story heard.82.11.121.200 (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is an encyclopedia article, and not a forum. Everything in the article is referenced, which means the information was derived from books or media articles. The Independent newspaper once apologised to Mr. Mardas, which was duly noted and reported in this article. Mr. Mardas could easily give an interview to a Greek journalist who has some knowledge of English, which would then be put into this article. If it's reported, it goes in here. If not, it doesn't. Sorry, but that's it.--andreasegde (talk) 17:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
