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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Walport. 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) 14:14, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Atbk ugotit I'm posting here to explain why I reverted your addition. I recognise that you are new, but I'd like you to take the time to read BLP and OR, especially the section on SYNTH carefully. Your text asserted that the subject of this BLP acted in a manner that was not consistent with the law, but I did not see anything in any of your sources supporting that assertion. We need to be very careful whenever we make an assertion of that nature about people, and have rock-solid sourcing. If there was some finding against the institution that he is in charge of, that is not the same as a finding against him personally, and there is no reason to mention it on this page (although you could potentially make a case for including it in our article about that institution). From the sources you provided though, I saw nothing to support even an assertion that the institution had not acted in accordance with the law - only that another body was taking action against them.
In short, then, this material does not seem to me to be suitable for inclusion. If I have misunderstood something please let me know - but make sure you have read the BLP guidelines carefully before responding, as they apply on talk pages just as they do in articles - you need to be careful of what you say about people anywhere on this site. Best GirthSummit (blether) 19:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I would like to publish here the edit that I wrote and then we can discuss it. Is that ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atbk ugotit ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Walport. 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) 14:14, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Atbk ugotit I'm posting here to explain why I reverted your addition. I recognise that you are new, but I'd like you to take the time to read BLP and OR, especially the section on SYNTH carefully. Your text asserted that the subject of this BLP acted in a manner that was not consistent with the law, but I did not see anything in any of your sources supporting that assertion. We need to be very careful whenever we make an assertion of that nature about people, and have rock-solid sourcing. If there was some finding against the institution that he is in charge of, that is not the same as a finding against him personally, and there is no reason to mention it on this page (although you could potentially make a case for including it in our article about that institution). From the sources you provided though, I saw nothing to support even an assertion that the institution had not acted in accordance with the law - only that another body was taking action against them.
In short, then, this material does not seem to me to be suitable for inclusion. If I have misunderstood something please let me know - but make sure you have read the BLP guidelines carefully before responding, as they apply on talk pages just as they do in articles - you need to be careful of what you say about people anywhere on this site. Best GirthSummit (blether) 19:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I would like to publish here the edit that I wrote and then we can discuss it. Is that ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atbk ugotit ( talk • contribs) 17:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)