User talk:Baderrutter

Hello and welcome to SourceWatch.

I wanted to explain my reversal of your edits to the Bader Rutter & Associates article. Two of our most important website policies are that any removal of referenced information must be fully explained on the article's associated "discussion" page. If there is a good reason for your removing information (e.g., it's wrong), then please explain your deletions on the talk page.

The other important policy is that all information must be referenced. You'll see I marked some of your additions as needing a reference. Please see SourceWatch:References for more info.

thanks,

Diane Farsetta 12:41, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

SW: Please keep the changes just made

All of those changes were made because the information was outdated. Everything added is true and correct. Thank you!

Response

Thanks for your response, however I have reversed many of your edits, because keeping a historical record of a firm's former clients is important to us. I have clarified that the article lists the firm's former and current clients.

In addition, we would appreciate your adding references for the material you submitted. I have currently marked these unsupported assertions as needing references. Again, you can find more information on this at SourceWatch:References.

-- Diane Farsetta 15:21, 20 October 2008 (EDT)