From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Legal Issues

The information this page includes is unnecessary. All sections talk about criminal charges and legal issues this should only be placed under the Legal Issues section. Wikipedia personal pages should be well-rounded while this page is extremely bias to the college admissions scandal. In example another defendant of the admissions scandal Felicity Huffman /info/en/?search=Felicity_Huffman has nothing shown in the information box related to the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4B00:8486:4700:B518:A236:2B42:F3AA ( talk) 13:59, 5 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi, I reverted your removal of info regarding the subject's legal issues from the lead. The lead is intended to summarize the article, and as such this information would be best left in. A Google search for David Sidoo yields numerous results regarding this information, and leaving it out would be undue coverage. The example you cited (Felicity Huffman) also has coverage of her controversy in the lead. If you are only concerned about the infobox, then you should make that clear and give some time for other users to respond to this before reverting changes, or risk being blocked for edit warring. At the time of this message, I'm the third person to disagree with you in the edit history. TL;DR: give it some time, let others respond, it only looks as though you're trying to sanitize the article which is generally frowned upon here. Thank you.  A S U K I T E  17:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC) reply

In Article Lead

As stated previously in this discussion and in previous edit descriptions, article leads are intended to surmise the most important points relating to the subject, including controversial elements. Given the WP:WEIGHT of WP:RS coverage of the article subject mention, or directly concern, legal issues, this must be granted due weight in the article lead. SamHolt6 ( talk) 17:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Legal Issues

The information this page includes is unnecessary. All sections talk about criminal charges and legal issues this should only be placed under the Legal Issues section. Wikipedia personal pages should be well-rounded while this page is extremely bias to the college admissions scandal. In example another defendant of the admissions scandal Felicity Huffman /info/en/?search=Felicity_Huffman has nothing shown in the information box related to the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4B00:8486:4700:B518:A236:2B42:F3AA ( talk) 13:59, 5 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hi, I reverted your removal of info regarding the subject's legal issues from the lead. The lead is intended to summarize the article, and as such this information would be best left in. A Google search for David Sidoo yields numerous results regarding this information, and leaving it out would be undue coverage. The example you cited (Felicity Huffman) also has coverage of her controversy in the lead. If you are only concerned about the infobox, then you should make that clear and give some time for other users to respond to this before reverting changes, or risk being blocked for edit warring. At the time of this message, I'm the third person to disagree with you in the edit history. TL;DR: give it some time, let others respond, it only looks as though you're trying to sanitize the article which is generally frowned upon here. Thank you.  A S U K I T E  17:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC) reply

In Article Lead

As stated previously in this discussion and in previous edit descriptions, article leads are intended to surmise the most important points relating to the subject, including controversial elements. Given the WP:WEIGHT of WP:RS coverage of the article subject mention, or directly concern, legal issues, this must be granted due weight in the article lead. SamHolt6 ( talk) 17:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC) reply


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook