![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
Since Wikipedia has issued a perma ban on user / editor Stetsonharry for abusive rules violations ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stetsonharry), I think that all of his arguments / discussions below should be ignored and not considered at all. Regarding the propriety of mentioning the criminal case against Bell in Florida, I think that it is very relevant. After all, this guy has been living the life of an alleged war hero for all of these past decades. That, in and of itself, adds credibility to whatever scam he may have allegedly committed. That status is what could have allowed him to gain the trust of the victim, bank, and government officials. While some people below have argued that Bell may have played a minor role in WW2, there is no way to know for certain how events would have played out had he not been there. The Bielski brothers were a group effort - not an individual one. Just like the efforts on Flight 93 by the passangers on 9/11. We will never know who did what. But in our hearts they are ALL heros. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.243.2.132 ( talk) 11:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Bielski clearly falls under the "non public figure" section of WP:BLP. That says: "Wikipedia also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability."
Since Bielski is notable only because of his participation in the Bielski partisans, the material about his 2007 arrest must be omitted and I am doing so. I doubt that Bielski is deserving of an article on his own. Since there is essentially nothing in this article after the arrest, and speculation concerning it, are removed, I've proposed this article for deletion. Stetsonharry ( talk) 15:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps shortening or rewording the last sentence would help ? After all he and his wife are still awaiting trial.-- Jacurek ( talk) 19:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
With the movie "Defiance" bringing light to their exploits, the Bielski brothers are finally emerging as significant figures in the history of the Holocaust (along with people like Oscar Schindler, Irena Sendler and Raoul Wallenberg). As one of the four brothers (and especially as the only surviving one) Aron Bielski definitely merits an article in Wikipedia, and I am surprised that anyone is seriously questioning this.
At the same time, I agree it is undeniable that the current article is a pathetic stub which, because of its shortness, gives undue prominence to Bell's 2007 criminal case. But the solution is to improve the article by expanding it and bringing things into proper perspective, not deleting it. 74.14.25.236 ( talk) 20:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
(restoring indent) Prosfilaes, that is the crux of the issue. I would suggest that this person is notable solely because of his role in the Bielski partisans, as dramatized in a movie, and not because of his ripping off an old lady last year. Contrast that with an article I've been editing on the B-movie actor I just alluded to, Lawrence Tierney, who was notable because he was an actor and because of his propensity for getting into bar fights, which hurt his career. In the case of Tierney, his arrests related specifically to the decline in his career and I personally inserted references to them. Here, we have a man noted for his being essentially a bystander in a partisan group when he was a child, and that role being dealt with in a movie.
Now, if he was so important that he merited a lengthy article, I can see inclusion of a reference to the arrest and settlement. But obviously that is not going to happen because of his tangential role in the partisans. So we have an article of limited length on a private person, describing mainly his legal problems and very minor role in the partisan group. Stetsonharry ( talk) 21:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I think that the article is more neutral than initially, but that the "later years" section continues to make the article problematic because it is dominated by his arrest on charges that were later dropped. There is ample precedent from other articles to removing references to, for example, SEC investigations that are initiated and then dropped. I believe the same principle applies here, and that the arrest should be removed.
Adding a section on the WWII massacre, which I removed, is not proper in this BLP and underlines my concern about this article. Stetsonharry ( talk) 13:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the section about "later life" is unsupportable under established BLP policy. There are three possible justification for such a section:
Given my respect for Pietrus, I do not delete it immediately out of hand, as I otherwise certainly would, but ask him to discuss it further. I suggest , however, that he delete it himself. DGG ( talk) 01:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
There are meaningful BLP and WP:UNDUE worries here. The charges were dropped and the article is so short, the narrative as now written seems to skew this person's whole life into what could be a very unfair and wholly misleading hint of wrongdoing. Gwen Gale ( talk) 01:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Can we solve the problems by shortening the info on the alleged crime, for example to: "In 2007, he was accused of fraud, but the case was settled in 2008". Would this be neutral enough? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Too little info in my opinion, I propose this as a minimunm:
Aron Bell (Bielski) was arrested in Florida in 2007 on suspicion of kidnapping and theft but the the case was settled out of court after Bieski agreed to pay restitution to alleged victim.-- Jacurek ( talk) 02:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I've taken it out. The event had nothing to do with his notability (which is thin to begin with), the charges were dropped and given the length of this article, could easily mislead readers ( WP:UNDUE). If this were a full length biography which gave more context to the subject's life, it could be kept. Gwen Gale ( talk) 03:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
(restoring indent)I'm sorry, but I could not disagree more with use of the word "censored" in this context. This is part of the longstanding policy of Wikipedia relating to living people who are not major public figures. An article on a movie actor emphasizing his sexual proclivities, for instance, is not proper unless it is a significant part of his life. To cite an example I've used before, again from my bailiwick of performing arts, Lawrence Tierney gave significant weight to his police troubles because that was why he was notable. He was notable as an actor who got into a lot of fights and was arrested many times, to the detriment of his career. William Eythe was notable as an actor not because he was supposedldy caught in the subway with some guy, or whatever it was. I have explained this several times and won't repeat myself any more, as it doesn't seem to be a principle that you accept and we'll have to agree to disagree. Stetsonharry ( talk) 05:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
We have a few basic policies. One of them is BLP, which can best be summarized: WP is not a tabloid. We do not publish derogatory information about people unrelated to their notability. It is not a matter of reacting or over-reacting, or of libel, but rather of the human decency to Do no harm. Of course we do not risk libel, but we do much more. To be more exact, we publishe negative information only in the following cases:
None of the three is at all the case here.
Pietrus, I am, frankly, surprised that an administrator here would have the lack of judgment to advocate putting the material in as external links, when, as you recognize, it can not be inserted in text. If anything, external links are more closely limited. Please real WP:EL for the circumstances in which they can be used. BLP can not be bypassed that way; I still respect your work--please do not disappoint my trust.
I have removed those links and I will ask for a block of anyone who reinserts them, admin or not. I do not think there is the last doubt at all that the block will stand.
Incidentally, BLP applies to discussions on talk pages as well, and offending material will be removed here also. DGG ( talk) 03:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry DGG, I respect your opinion but I'm still highly unconvinced by your arguments. Perhaps even more than Piotrus. Frankly...this "censorship" is a little shocking to me...-- Jacurek ( talk) 06:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Didn't he own and operate a fleet of taxis in New York? Badagnani ( talk) 09:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Considering that since the article creation, various editors keep adding the info on his arrest (which is reliably sourced) I think we should agree that this is a notable part of his biography. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
To echo the above:
Nowhere in the bios of Asael, Tuvia or Zus is it mentioned that Aron also worked for this NYC trucking company. Is this because it wasn't mentioned in the epilogue of the film Defiance? It seems odd that this basic fact would be ommited from his brothers' biographies. 63.143.233.12 ( talk) 20:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aron Bielski. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Aron Bielski. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
Since Wikipedia has issued a perma ban on user / editor Stetsonharry for abusive rules violations ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stetsonharry), I think that all of his arguments / discussions below should be ignored and not considered at all. Regarding the propriety of mentioning the criminal case against Bell in Florida, I think that it is very relevant. After all, this guy has been living the life of an alleged war hero for all of these past decades. That, in and of itself, adds credibility to whatever scam he may have allegedly committed. That status is what could have allowed him to gain the trust of the victim, bank, and government officials. While some people below have argued that Bell may have played a minor role in WW2, there is no way to know for certain how events would have played out had he not been there. The Bielski brothers were a group effort - not an individual one. Just like the efforts on Flight 93 by the passangers on 9/11. We will never know who did what. But in our hearts they are ALL heros. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.243.2.132 ( talk) 11:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Bielski clearly falls under the "non public figure" section of WP:BLP. That says: "Wikipedia also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability."
Since Bielski is notable only because of his participation in the Bielski partisans, the material about his 2007 arrest must be omitted and I am doing so. I doubt that Bielski is deserving of an article on his own. Since there is essentially nothing in this article after the arrest, and speculation concerning it, are removed, I've proposed this article for deletion. Stetsonharry ( talk) 15:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps shortening or rewording the last sentence would help ? After all he and his wife are still awaiting trial.-- Jacurek ( talk) 19:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
With the movie "Defiance" bringing light to their exploits, the Bielski brothers are finally emerging as significant figures in the history of the Holocaust (along with people like Oscar Schindler, Irena Sendler and Raoul Wallenberg). As one of the four brothers (and especially as the only surviving one) Aron Bielski definitely merits an article in Wikipedia, and I am surprised that anyone is seriously questioning this.
At the same time, I agree it is undeniable that the current article is a pathetic stub which, because of its shortness, gives undue prominence to Bell's 2007 criminal case. But the solution is to improve the article by expanding it and bringing things into proper perspective, not deleting it. 74.14.25.236 ( talk) 20:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
(restoring indent) Prosfilaes, that is the crux of the issue. I would suggest that this person is notable solely because of his role in the Bielski partisans, as dramatized in a movie, and not because of his ripping off an old lady last year. Contrast that with an article I've been editing on the B-movie actor I just alluded to, Lawrence Tierney, who was notable because he was an actor and because of his propensity for getting into bar fights, which hurt his career. In the case of Tierney, his arrests related specifically to the decline in his career and I personally inserted references to them. Here, we have a man noted for his being essentially a bystander in a partisan group when he was a child, and that role being dealt with in a movie.
Now, if he was so important that he merited a lengthy article, I can see inclusion of a reference to the arrest and settlement. But obviously that is not going to happen because of his tangential role in the partisans. So we have an article of limited length on a private person, describing mainly his legal problems and very minor role in the partisan group. Stetsonharry ( talk) 21:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I think that the article is more neutral than initially, but that the "later years" section continues to make the article problematic because it is dominated by his arrest on charges that were later dropped. There is ample precedent from other articles to removing references to, for example, SEC investigations that are initiated and then dropped. I believe the same principle applies here, and that the arrest should be removed.
Adding a section on the WWII massacre, which I removed, is not proper in this BLP and underlines my concern about this article. Stetsonharry ( talk) 13:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the section about "later life" is unsupportable under established BLP policy. There are three possible justification for such a section:
Given my respect for Pietrus, I do not delete it immediately out of hand, as I otherwise certainly would, but ask him to discuss it further. I suggest , however, that he delete it himself. DGG ( talk) 01:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
There are meaningful BLP and WP:UNDUE worries here. The charges were dropped and the article is so short, the narrative as now written seems to skew this person's whole life into what could be a very unfair and wholly misleading hint of wrongdoing. Gwen Gale ( talk) 01:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Can we solve the problems by shortening the info on the alleged crime, for example to: "In 2007, he was accused of fraud, but the case was settled in 2008". Would this be neutral enough? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Too little info in my opinion, I propose this as a minimunm:
Aron Bell (Bielski) was arrested in Florida in 2007 on suspicion of kidnapping and theft but the the case was settled out of court after Bieski agreed to pay restitution to alleged victim.-- Jacurek ( talk) 02:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I've taken it out. The event had nothing to do with his notability (which is thin to begin with), the charges were dropped and given the length of this article, could easily mislead readers ( WP:UNDUE). If this were a full length biography which gave more context to the subject's life, it could be kept. Gwen Gale ( talk) 03:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
(restoring indent)I'm sorry, but I could not disagree more with use of the word "censored" in this context. This is part of the longstanding policy of Wikipedia relating to living people who are not major public figures. An article on a movie actor emphasizing his sexual proclivities, for instance, is not proper unless it is a significant part of his life. To cite an example I've used before, again from my bailiwick of performing arts, Lawrence Tierney gave significant weight to his police troubles because that was why he was notable. He was notable as an actor who got into a lot of fights and was arrested many times, to the detriment of his career. William Eythe was notable as an actor not because he was supposedldy caught in the subway with some guy, or whatever it was. I have explained this several times and won't repeat myself any more, as it doesn't seem to be a principle that you accept and we'll have to agree to disagree. Stetsonharry ( talk) 05:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
We have a few basic policies. One of them is BLP, which can best be summarized: WP is not a tabloid. We do not publish derogatory information about people unrelated to their notability. It is not a matter of reacting or over-reacting, or of libel, but rather of the human decency to Do no harm. Of course we do not risk libel, but we do much more. To be more exact, we publishe negative information only in the following cases:
None of the three is at all the case here.
Pietrus, I am, frankly, surprised that an administrator here would have the lack of judgment to advocate putting the material in as external links, when, as you recognize, it can not be inserted in text. If anything, external links are more closely limited. Please real WP:EL for the circumstances in which they can be used. BLP can not be bypassed that way; I still respect your work--please do not disappoint my trust.
I have removed those links and I will ask for a block of anyone who reinserts them, admin or not. I do not think there is the last doubt at all that the block will stand.
Incidentally, BLP applies to discussions on talk pages as well, and offending material will be removed here also. DGG ( talk) 03:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry DGG, I respect your opinion but I'm still highly unconvinced by your arguments. Perhaps even more than Piotrus. Frankly...this "censorship" is a little shocking to me...-- Jacurek ( talk) 06:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Didn't he own and operate a fleet of taxis in New York? Badagnani ( talk) 09:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Considering that since the article creation, various editors keep adding the info on his arrest (which is reliably sourced) I think we should agree that this is a notable part of his biography. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
To echo the above:
Nowhere in the bios of Asael, Tuvia or Zus is it mentioned that Aron also worked for this NYC trucking company. Is this because it wasn't mentioned in the epilogue of the film Defiance? It seems odd that this basic fact would be ommited from his brothers' biographies. 63.143.233.12 ( talk) 20:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aron Bielski. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Aron Bielski. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)