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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
The controversial section was removed because the case in question was dealt with in a civil court and did not escalate to criminal charges. The details surrounding the case remain unverified and were not validated in court. There's substantial apprehension about the potential for defamation since the individual who lost the lawsuit to Freedman (who was acting on behalf of the individual's husband) instigated this investigation. This situation strongly hints at vengeance and borders on a potential violation of the WP:BLP policy. The source is not suitable for referencing on the personal pages of living individuals. Pestalozzi90 ( talk) 07:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Reverted edit.
The material in question does not constitute defamation, as it references a verified and credible news source. The reported settlement amount is accurate and thus meets Wikipedia's criteria for verifiability. The removal of this content, especially on dubious legal grounds, suggests a conflict of interest on the part of the user who deleted it. If we were to exclude all civil settlement information for living persons, that policy would also apply to any settlements that the subject has reached on behalf of clients, paradoxically.
Requesting admin oversight due to the controversial nature of the edits and potential conflict of interest involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthteller145 ( talk • contribs) 03:06, 12 September 2023 (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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
The controversial section was removed because the case in question was dealt with in a civil court and did not escalate to criminal charges. The details surrounding the case remain unverified and were not validated in court. There's substantial apprehension about the potential for defamation since the individual who lost the lawsuit to Freedman (who was acting on behalf of the individual's husband) instigated this investigation. This situation strongly hints at vengeance and borders on a potential violation of the WP:BLP policy. The source is not suitable for referencing on the personal pages of living individuals. Pestalozzi90 ( talk) 07:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Reverted edit.
The material in question does not constitute defamation, as it references a verified and credible news source. The reported settlement amount is accurate and thus meets Wikipedia's criteria for verifiability. The removal of this content, especially on dubious legal grounds, suggests a conflict of interest on the part of the user who deleted it. If we were to exclude all civil settlement information for living persons, that policy would also apply to any settlements that the subject has reached on behalf of clients, paradoxically.
Requesting admin oversight due to the controversial nature of the edits and potential conflict of interest involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthteller145 ( talk • contribs) 03:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC)