09:4909:49, 20 July 2024diffhist+114
Lucy Letby
Your removal of the good summary in the lead, and then your reversion of my re-written and updated sumamry, and then your reversion of that again are POV and examples of
WP:POINT. I dispute the neutrality of any article that refuses to state that the subject maintains her innocence. This is not how we write BLPs.
08:4508:45, 20 July 2024diffhist+1
Lucy Letby
dummy edit: summary of information that is already in the MAIN body. It is a good summary. If you think we should not tell anyone that Letby maintains her innocence, perhaps you can explain why the cited information in the main leads on that very fact.
08:4008:40, 20 July 2024diffhist+250
Lucy Letby
→Doubts about the conviction: Not sure why that sentence was summarily dropped. It was arguably in the wrong section (it was previously in the evidence section), but clearly relevant. As the doubt was not raised at trial, it sits better in this section.
08:3308:33, 20 July 2024diffhist−871
Lucy Letby
→Doubts about the conviction: As this section is being kept focussed on the doubts, that is off topic, and it interrupts what follows (in response to these doubts...). It is enough to note, as we still do, that teh case has generated considerable public interest.
08:1808:18, 20 July 2024diffhist−133
Lucy Letby
Not a summary of the main. We say she removed handover sheets, but the reason given here is not established in the main. The fact, without established reason, is undue. There was plenty of circumstantial evidence, so unclear why we picked out that one.
18:5918:59, 18 July 2024diffhist−120
Wilson's School
→History: Previous editor was correct it is not a copyvio from that page. There is another source given that I'll follow up now to see if there is copy/paste from that and whether it verifiescurrent
18:5818:58, 18 July 2024diffhist−289
Wilson's School
→Foundation: Per message on talk page, 27 March 2007, the school took this history and used it on their web page. It therefore is not a copyvio from that source but cannot be sourced to it (citogenesis).
11:2311:23, 18 July 2024diffhist−119
Jim Ratcliffe
Being the minority owner of a company is not an occupation. Also INEOS is already linked so the added link is
MOS:OVERLINK. No strong feelings about capitalisation, although the sources I have read capitalise it. The linked page is inconsistent on that.Tag: Undo
09:4909:49, 20 July 2024diffhist+114
Lucy Letby
Your removal of the good summary in the lead, and then your reversion of my re-written and updated sumamry, and then your reversion of that again are POV and examples of
WP:POINT. I dispute the neutrality of any article that refuses to state that the subject maintains her innocence. This is not how we write BLPs.
08:4508:45, 20 July 2024diffhist+1
Lucy Letby
dummy edit: summary of information that is already in the MAIN body. It is a good summary. If you think we should not tell anyone that Letby maintains her innocence, perhaps you can explain why the cited information in the main leads on that very fact.
08:4008:40, 20 July 2024diffhist+250
Lucy Letby
→Doubts about the conviction: Not sure why that sentence was summarily dropped. It was arguably in the wrong section (it was previously in the evidence section), but clearly relevant. As the doubt was not raised at trial, it sits better in this section.
08:3308:33, 20 July 2024diffhist−871
Lucy Letby
→Doubts about the conviction: As this section is being kept focussed on the doubts, that is off topic, and it interrupts what follows (in response to these doubts...). It is enough to note, as we still do, that teh case has generated considerable public interest.
08:1808:18, 20 July 2024diffhist−133
Lucy Letby
Not a summary of the main. We say she removed handover sheets, but the reason given here is not established in the main. The fact, without established reason, is undue. There was plenty of circumstantial evidence, so unclear why we picked out that one.
18:5918:59, 18 July 2024diffhist−120
Wilson's School
→History: Previous editor was correct it is not a copyvio from that page. There is another source given that I'll follow up now to see if there is copy/paste from that and whether it verifiescurrent
18:5818:58, 18 July 2024diffhist−289
Wilson's School
→Foundation: Per message on talk page, 27 March 2007, the school took this history and used it on their web page. It therefore is not a copyvio from that source but cannot be sourced to it (citogenesis).
11:2311:23, 18 July 2024diffhist−119
Jim Ratcliffe
Being the minority owner of a company is not an occupation. Also INEOS is already linked so the added link is
MOS:OVERLINK. No strong feelings about capitalisation, although the sources I have read capitalise it. The linked page is inconsistent on that.Tag: Undo