This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
As per WP:BLPCRIME: A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
That by itself is enough to completely remove the controversy section, at least until someone rewrites it unbiased.
I removed, but User:SunDawn keeps reverting.
Note that the allegations are from 2017. I have personally seen the judge order from July 2018, where it says "not guilty nf all charges". Yet that has not been reported anywhere, so I cannot reference it.
— behdad ( talk) 03:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links.
access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{ cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.-- Otr500 ( talk) 20:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
As per WP:BLPCRIME: A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
That by itself is enough to completely remove the controversy section, at least until someone rewrites it unbiased.
I removed, but User:SunDawn keeps reverting.
Note that the allegations are from 2017. I have personally seen the judge order from July 2018, where it says "not guilty nf all charges". Yet that has not been reported anywhere, so I cannot reference it.
— behdad ( talk) 03:36, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links.
access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{ cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.-- Otr500 ( talk) 20:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)