Talk:Michael W. Halberstam

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Michael W. Halberstam. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001134252/http://www.writerstheatre.org/tools/briefchronicledocs/files/WT_BC_26_RG_web.pdf to http://www.writerstheatre.org/tools/briefchronicledocs/files/WT_BC_26_RG_web.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001134316/http://www.writerstheatre.org/tools/briefchronicledocs/files/0010.pdf to http://www.writerstheatre.org/tools/briefchronicledocs/files/0010.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726063349/http://www.writerstheatre.org/aboutus/aboutus/aboutus?id=0008 to http://www.writerstheatre.org/aboutus/aboutus/aboutus?id=0008

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 14:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Trolling and personal attacks on this page

This page is being trolled. Any attempts by anyone to edit or shift or add to the narrative immediately reverts. The opening sentence has the line added: "He resigned after years of reported harassment and abuse from artists working at the theater." Halberstam was Artistic Director for 30 years and during that time enjoyed enormous success. After the reported harassment charges were dismissed following a thorough investigation, certain members of the Chicago Theatre community refused to accept the results and continued to assert abuse although no specific allegations ever surfaced. In the article cited here the words "harassment and abuse" do not appear and neither is it suggested that this characterized Halberstam's entire tenure. In fact the article states: "Halberstam also has had supporters within the theater community and no legal charges appear to have been made." Later the person trolling the page has added the following: "Writers Theatre has no human resources department.[8] During his tenure, Halberstam used this to his advantage, often joking about calling HR after he said or did something inappropriate, knowing that his victim had no recourse.[9]" First of all this is not true. If you follow the link cited it takes you to an HR representative. Writers Theatre always had an HR function and until Mr. Robson tweeted there were no prior complaints. The article cited later states that HR jokes were made but the accusation that follows in the above sentence is conjecture and not supported by the article. The article by the way was not fact checked or corroborated and was based on the words of one disgruntled former employee, Doug Peck, who's ex-husband, cited in the article, publicly denies his claim. Later the person trolling the page writes: "During the investigation, he maintained his position of power, continuing to direct the theater's mainstage production of The Importance of Being Earnest. Industry publication PerformInk reported, "from off-hand sexual comments to egregious propositions, the environment at Writers is one that is often described as sexually-charged, led by the otherwise well-respected co-founder of the 25-year-old company."[13] He resigned from the theater in 2021 after continued reports of harassment and abuse.[14][15]" This, again, is false. Writers Theatre had a board of directors and a staff who managed the investigation with full transparency and professionalism. The cast of THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST were polled and requested that Halberstam remain at the helm of the show and stated that they felt safe. The inference is that Halberstam used his authority to remain in power when in fact it was the cast that requested he continue in his work. Furthermore there were no further reports of harassment or abuse. What is cited here results from a concerted effort by some online actors to slander Halberstam and the use of heightened language is a clear example of the bullying and harassment some in the community perpetrated upon him and the theatre company. These are highly subjective opinions worded in very inflammatory ways intended to inflict harm about Halberstam rather than report objectively and factually the events leading up to his resignation. NotDickens (talk) 20:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

This is an inappropriate request. If you have a complaint about a user's conduct, you should take it to WP:ANI, not make a request of a random administrator.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. My apologies. When I asked my initial question I thought I was told to bring it up on the talk page. I'm having a hard time understanding the procedure but will try to follow it more appropriately. Thank you for your response. NotDickens (talk) 22:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I've clicked on the WP:ANI link you shared but I don't really understand what to do from there. Can you advise please? NotDickens (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, NotDickens. What you have here is a content dispute. It is possible that some editors are not acting in good faith (I haven't actually looked), but the default assumption is that they are, and what you should be doing here is engaging with them here (assuming good faith) and trying to reach consensus. If you cannot, then pursue the steps outlined in dispute resolution.

If you have evidence that some editor or editors are editing disruptively, or otherwise breaking Wikipedia's policies or procedures, then you can report those editors to ANI, with evidence of the behavioural issue. ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. That is very helpful. NotDickens (talk) 01:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The primary complaint here seems to be that the sources either don't back up what is being said or aren't reliable. Aside from rescripted.org (which I'm not sure about), they all seem to be reputable publications, and on a quick glance, they adequately support what's in the article - except the link to the current writerstheatre.org website, which is useless as far as verifying any claims about what was or was not in place years ago. A secondary source would be much better. Perhaps someone else is willing to spend more time taking a closer look at the sources. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 20:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Also pinging 2003 LN6, so they're aware of this conversation. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 20:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)