![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
Article has a section on him "possibly" being a secret Roman Catholic. Per prior discussions on this and related pages, I enquire as to whether such speculation on religion is proper in a BLP. Collect ( talk) 12:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
The nonsense has been removed ( diff), but in case there is any doubt, no article should record such speculation with such weak sources and nonexistent attempt to suggest the material is of any significance other than fun gossip. It was ok for the media to report the speculation at the time, but it is not suitable for a bio unless there is some serious suggestion of the material's veracity (and in that sense, the sources are pathetic). Johnuniq ( talk) 11:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
The biography of Ron Freeman, Olympic athlete, incorrectly confuses him with an individual of the same name who was a teacher at Monte Vista High School and died in 2011. Ron Freeman, the athlete, is still alive, and this erroneous report of his death is causing great concern among his friends and classmates from Elizabeth, NJ. An error as severe as this cannot wait for the vetting cycle to allow me to be able to edit the page myself.
This is the current entry: Ronald ("Ron") J. Freeman II (born June 12, 1947) is a former American athlete, winner of gold medal in 4x400 m relay at the 1968 Summer Olympics.
Born in Elizabeth, New Jersey, Ron Freeman was third in 400 m and ran the second leg in the American 4x400 m relay team, which won the gold medal with a new world record of 2.56.11.
Following his Olympic career, Freeman taught Physical Education and World History at Monta Vista High School. He died of a heart attack in 2011.
The following is from MercuryNews.com:
Ron "Screamin" Freeman
Resident of Los Altos
Passed away suddenly on Jan. 21. He was 52. Ron was a cornerstone in the South Bay water polo community. He spent the last 30 years teaching and coaching at Monta Vista High School in Cupertino. He was instrumental in the USA Water Polo Olympic Development Program, De Anza Water Polo Club, and the De Anza-Cupertino Aquatics program. He was also involved with the Junior Olympics, serving as team lead on the 1997 U.S. World Champion Team.
For more about Ron go to the Face Book page "Ron Freeman was my water polo coach and History teacher".
Ron is survived by his mother and stepfather Miriam and Ken Clark, his brothers Richard, Dean, John, and Wayne Freeman, and his sister Cathleen Bridenstein.
Ron's Memorial will be at Monta Vista High School gym Friday, Feb. 18 at 3 p.m. In lieu of flowers donations can be made to the Ron Freeman Memorial Fund, care of Monta Vista High School, 21840 McClellan Rd., Cupertino, CA 95014. Published in San Jose Mercury News/San Mateo County Times on February 3, 2011
Please immediately correct this error. Thank you
96.41.104.165 (talk) 05:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Moved here, originally posted on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons, in order to bring it to more people's attention to fix if needed. Jnorton7558 ( talk) 07:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
The article on the controversial Singaporean celebrity blogger Xiaxue has a history of BLP problems. I recently rewrote the article and aim to make it my 7th GA. However, I am not very familiar with the details of the BLP policy, so I would like my version to be checked for BLP compliance. If there are any violations, please assume good faith, correct them and explain them to me (and should you need any clarification regarding facts or sources, feel free to ask). Thanks! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 08:59, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
place of birth is Amman - Jordan and not Syria, and was born to Jordanian parents and not Syrian parents — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.249.24.194 ( talk) 09:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Richard Granger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Newly-created article which appears to have a very negative slant. Subject is the former head of NHS Connecting for Health, responsible for introducing an IT system which has come in for criticism. I'm concerned about the general neutrality and tone of the article. January ( talk) 10:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
John Anderson, 3rd Viscount Waverley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has an editor seeking to add material which is unreferenced and unsourced, and quite contentious. Romoval of such at [1] was reverted, second removal was met with [2] and the unhelpful edit summary of Removal of all non-referenced content, as exemplified by Collect. The specific prior claims (?) were defamatory, and the current claim about a minor appears afoul of WP:BLP (not copied here as BLP applies here as well!). More eyes needed - as this edoitor seems a tad determined on the issue of father and son. Collect ( talk) 16:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Dealt with by various people at AN/I, thanks to all concerned. Sergeant Cribb ( talk) 06:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Johnny Tri Nguyen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An IP keeps re-inserting which apartment the article subject lives in. Thoughts? 28bytes ( talk) 01:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
(move from BLPN talk) -- J N 466 16:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm seeking consensus here as to whether we should be linking to the personal website Dan Savage set up about Rick Santorum, the former senator for Pennsylvania. For those of you not familiar with the background, Savage is an American freelance columnist who set up a website intended to spread a vulgar definition of Santorum's surname. He did this in response to comments Santorum made about homosexuality that the gay community and others found offensive.
We have several articles that refer to the controversy, including Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The question is whether we should be linking to Savage's website directly, or whether we should only cite secondary sources that refer to it. WP:BLPSPS is clear on this point, namely that self-published sources must not be cited for material about living persons. But when I remove the site, I'm being reverted, [3] [4] so fresh input would be appreciated. SlimVirgin TALK| CONTRIBS 15:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject ( see below). ... External links about living persons, whether in BLPs or elsewhere, are held to a higher standard than for other topics. Questionable or self-published sources should not be included in the "Further reading" or "External links" sections of BLPs, and when including such links in other articles make sure the material linked to does not violate this policy. ... In general, do not link to websites that contradict the spirit of this policy or violate the External links guideline. Where that guideline is inconsistent with this or any other policy, the policies prevail.
"In biographies of living people, material available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all, either as sources or via external links. External links in biographies of living persons must be of high quality and are judged by a higher standard than for other articles. Do not link to websites that are not fully compliant with this guideline or that contradict the spirit of WP:BLP."
Might I suggest this discussion be moved to the actual noticeboard, instead of the talkpage? -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Edit conflict
The policy is clear on this point: "Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject ..." See WP:BLPSPS. SlimVirgin TALK| CONTRIBS 17:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
What, exactly, is the point of not including the link if we're including the URL? Is it to make it purposefully inconvenient for our readers, who will wonder why we can't master the idea of hyperlinks? That seems to me to be the AGF explanation, and the other ones I can think of would probably get me sanctioned if I posted them. The idea that we can mention the name of the site, mention its URL, but can't link it because OMG it might violate BLP then is wikilawyering at its most despicable, and contains not one shred of common sense. This seems like a clear place where a combination of WP:COMMONSENSE and WP:IAR need to apply. // ⌘macwhiz ( talk) 18:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
*ROTFL!!! "You probably could not completely understand the topic without seeing the website." BWAHAAHAHAHAHAH! That's the funniest thing I've read in ages! ROTFL! Oh, man, would you mind coming over to help fight the
NFCC Wars?. Your input is just priceless! lol!
Dreadstar
☥
20:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Responses, I've been gone: BLP applies here to statements about Santorum or Savage... but not to discussion of the campaign itself. We aren't writing a BLP, and BLP applies only peripherally. The policy "when including such links in other articles make sure the material linked to does not violate this policy" is very clear. So maybe we should not link directly. However, the spirit of that policy is that we should not write "spreadingsantorum.com" either. But that is nonsensical in this case, so we should
ignore it, perhaps to the extent of direct linking, though that's not strictly necessary in order to write a proper article. (A direct link to the site will not effect Google because of the nofollow property.)
"And who is the subject of Campaign for "santorum" neologism? --Protonk" Why, no one: we're talking about a campaign. If not, then there is a major problem here, and I'll immediately delete 95% of this article.
"When the oversight isn't present we don't link to the source unless the source is writing about itself/himself/herself. --olive" I think we can safely say that in an article about the campaign, spreadingsantorum.com is writing about the campaign, and as part of the campaign is writing about itself. But this is confusing an article about the campaign with an article on Santorum. If we're writing an article on Santorum, then the site is not something we use. If we're writing about the campaign, then BLP is peripheral and anyway, the site is "about itself."
Anyway, what we have here is strained arguments about how we should not link to a site which is central to the subject of the article- the campaign. I believe we at least need to have the site mentioned in plain text, and that it is acceptable to have it as a link; and that there is no real difference between the two except convenience to the reader. Perhaps also, Wikipedia's reputation as a source which does not flinch for no reason from covering any subject impartially. Maybe we should not have this article, but those who feel this way (I will say it again) need to formulate their ideas as policy, or else appeals to inapplicable policy or emotion are not going to fly. I would definitely support such an attempt because even if it failed we would learn a great deal. BE——Critical__ Talk 02:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I think it's clear that the policy, literally applied, prohibits linking to the site. I think it's also clear that the policy is not meant to be for that sort of case and should not be interpreted literally. The ban on linking to self-published derogatory material is meant to apply when the link is used as a substitute for including the derogatory material in the article. If the article is about the existence of derogatory material, then this becomes a non-concern; the derogatory material is in the article anyway. Ken Arromdee ( talk) 19:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
It would be nice to get some uninvovled commentary on this. I realize half the Wiki has chimed in at some point or another, but I'm sure there are people who haven't who regularly work in BLP areas who might have something to say. Some fresh voices might be helpful here. Thanks. Griswaldo ( talk) 18:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Review article links to the WR website. The Encyclopedia Dramatica article links to mirrors of that semi-defunct website. Those websites also engage in crude or scatological attacks on living people. I don't see the difference. I've previously said that we shouldn't link to such sites, but if they're allowed then we should be consistent. Will Beback talk 20:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Is this an attempt to resurrect a dead proposal by creeping it up in a few cases (like santorum (neologism)) and then applying it to more general cases later? Sure feels like it. Once we disregard our dislike of Dan Savage's web site it becomes a simple matter of editorial decision making whether we should link to it, and there is no other reason not to. This is the primary website about the primary topic of the article. No brainer, link it. SchmuckyTheCat ( talk)
On Kate Bornstein's article, there is a pronoun dispute.
Kate Bornstein uses the gender neutral pronouns "ze" and "hir". This was changed twice, but reverted each time. Editors who edit hir's page keep using female pronouns even outside of the article even though ze actively uses the neutral pronouns and discusses this in hir's speaking engagements and books.
While this may seem like a small issue of technicalities, I cannot emphasize enough how offensive it is to not allow some one's preferred pronoun to be used. Especially with in Queer Studies - a field in which Bornstein plays a prominent roll.
For easy reference and both sides arguments, here is the talk page -- Sanctusorium ( talk) 03:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
The article Kreayshawn had major problems with vandalism, saying that she is "white trash", etc. I've tried to revert all of them, but I might have missed some. It seems like this article has been heavily vandalised recently, so I just wanted to give a heads up, and recommend that maybe someone go through the sources and make sure that everything is correct. I reverted to an older version that looked like it had less vandalism, but I still found a few problems. ~ Mesoderm ( talk) 07:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
It appears an unknown user has made defamatory/libelous posts about the son of the above. Although this has now been reversed by another user, it still shows up on the history page. Is there any way of permanently deleting the comments?
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Dave_Scully&action=historysubmit&diff=436183130&oldid=436183028
Done --
Floquenbeam (
talk)
18:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Horacio Gutiérrez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Additional eyes on this one please. A new editor has been turning it into a PR-style promo piece and has been reverted several times, including twice by me today. – ukexpat ( talk) 19:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
We need some input on a template change which occurred today. Without any prior discussion the "Template:Birth date and age" default was changed from "mf" to "df". this affects 100s of 1000s of articles all over wikipedia. Perhaps none more so than in this project. Let me add that I have no problem with the WP:BOLDness of this change but I do think that a) it should be changed back until b) a larger discussion comes to a consensus on this. The current discussion is here Template talk:Birth date and age#Current format. Thanks ahead of time for any input that members of this project can add. MarnetteD | Talk 21:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
User:Poyani ( contributions, edit count) restored contentious poorly sourced material to the talk page of CounterPunch, after I had redacted "[name removed], the Swedish feminist" to "[a] Swedish feminist".
My talk page discusses this event, and whether reliable sources name the complainant/victim: User_talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#Rape_Complaintant_and_WP:BLP.
User:Poyani wrote that "I am going to mention this person's name on Julian Assenge's talk page. Feel free to file a report on BLP noticeboards. I want to test this.", so I alert BLPN now. User:Poyani added the name.
Please see the extensive discussion in your archives. 21:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Lifting a hand ... to help good, wise, or great, to bar that foul storm out, Kiefer. Wolfowitz 21:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Rick Hill ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is an individual or individuals have been repeatedly posting partisan and opinion based, false, information and removing facts about this person from his term in Congress. I think it is improper to be using Wikipedia as a forum for political rhetoric and hope this can be resolved.
Thank you.
Feona Bessemer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Febessemer ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a biographical page that is being defamed with political rhetoric. Please remove the page or lock it after a consensus on it's content is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Febessemer ( talk • contribs) 22:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Melissa Scott (pastor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
article is poorly sourced — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.179.144 ( talk) 22:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Michael Lissack ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is Michael Lissack. The article about me keeps getting re-edited to suggest that I pled guilty to charges which I DID NOT. I have put the correct record (with a link to the law itself) back several times and another editor keeps removing the link and changing the language back to words which I find to be inaccurate, libelous and defamatory. HELP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.203.10.194 ( talk) 17:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have done my best to take into account all the comments and still make things accurate. The parking ticket reference is out and there is just a straightforward reference to the civil violation and its case law. Per another comment I added the SEC sanction and provided both the link to the sanction itself and to the book chapter describing what happened. My issue was a simple one -- I never pled guilty to a crime and it is just hurtful and wrong to state that I did. Hopefully the full exchange has gotten all of this to a better place Michaellissack ( talk) 23:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have edited the passage about Lissack's guilty plea. First, I could find no support for him having pled guilty to a "civil violation". If I missed something, please show me. Second, the passage cited to primary sources for statutes for no good reason, as well as a blog for no good reason. I removed those references. I also added a sentence that states that Lissack was neither jailed nor fined based on his guilty plea, which was stated in one of the cited sources. As far as I can tell, the passage now conforms to the reliable sources that I left in.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
FYI: There is a discussion about this same issue going on at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Michael_Lissack_article_legal_claims ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 00:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
HELP If you read the statute (which is why I had cited it) the very last line states clearly that second degree harassment is a violation. see http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/PEN0240.26_240.26.html the blog was cited as it explained very clearly that ALL VIOLATIONS are civilk not criminal see http://www.newyorkcriminallawyerblog.com/2009/02/criminal_law_101_defining_felo_1.html I have no problem witn taking responsibility for what I did but why does everyone here seem to insist that it is okay to imply I did much worse? I never pled guilty to any crime. Please put back the references which make that clear. (BTW the current rewrite otherwise reads much better than prior versions) Michaellissack ( talk) 02:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I must thank everyone. The article reads much better and I have been treated fairly. AND in less than 24 hours!! Thanks Michaellissack ( talk) 07:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Article seems to have been written by subject and reads as an advertisement. Following many of the references ultimately leads back to subject's website. Article seems to violate Biographies of Living Persons standards and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wraythe ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Glenn Leonard ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I had previously posted the accurate information that Glenn Leonard is under a permanent federal injunction which prohibits him from commercial use of the name "Temptations" in any manner. I posted the case number and docket number of that permanent injunction, which is a matter of public record. Accurate reporting of a public record cannot be libelous. That posting was removed and the article now reports that Glenn Leonard currently performs as the "Temptations Revue" -- which appears to be a violation of the express terms of the permanent injunction.
Case Title: Williams v. SBE etc., et al. Court: U.S. District Court, Central District of California Judge: Hon. Gary A. Feess Case Number: 07-CV-07006-GAF Case filed: 2007 Permanent Injunction Entered: 2/5/2010 (Docket #328) Corrected Permanent Injunction Entered: 3/26/10 (Docket #339)
Full Text of Corrected Permanent Injunction:
Upon the settlement agreement and stipulation of Plaintiff OTIS WILLIAMS and Defendant GLENN LEONARD, entry of permanent injunction is GRANTED, as follows:
Defendant GLENN LEONARD, his employees, officers, agents, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all those acting in active concert and/or participation with any of them, who shall receive actual notice of this Order, are hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from engaging in the following activities, or in any of them:
(1) Directly or indirectly infringing upon the goodwill associated with plaintiff’s service mark “The Temptations”;
(2) Directly or indirectly infringing upon the trade name “The Temptations” or using plaintiff’s trade name in any manner, including generally but not limited to advertising, promoting, performing, and/or exhibiting the services of defendant LEONARD or of anyone else that infringes said trade name;
(3) Engaging in any conduct that tends falsely to represent , or is likely to confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers, defendant LEONARD’s customers, and/or members of the public believe, that the actions of defendant LEONARD, including the advertisement, promotion, performance, and/or exhibition of any performance or performers under the name “The Temptations,” or any similar incarnation of the name, are sponsored, approved, or licensed by plaintiff, or are in some way associated, affiliated, or connected with plaintiff and/or with “The Temptations”;
(4) Affixing, applying, annexing, or using in connection with the advertisement, promotion, performance, and/or exhibition of any performance or performers under the name “The Temptations,” or any similar incarnation of the name, a false description or representation, including words or false symbols tending to describe or represent such goods or services as being those of plaintiff;
(5) Diluting and/or infringing plaintiff’s trade name “The Temptations,” and/or damaging plaintiff’s goodwill, reputation, and business;
(6) Effecting assignments or transfers, granting purported licenses, forming new entities or associations, or utilizing any other means or device for the purpose of circumventing or otherwise avoiding the prohibitions set forth in paragraph (1) through (5), above.
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ P. 54 (b), the court hereby makes an express determination that there is no just reason for delay, and expressly directs entry of this judgment of permanent injunction, forthwith.
The Court further Orders that the counterclaim of GLENN LEONARD on file herein is dismissed forthwith, with prejudice.
The Court further Orders that the separate related action entitled Live Gold etc., et al., v. UMG etc., et al. on file in this District Court as Case No. 09-cv-00417 is likewise dismissed forthwith, with prejudice.
This Order is without prejudice as to the joint and several obligation of GLENN LEONARD in respect to this Court’s previous finding of contempt and award of sanctions thereon as against the said Defendant GLENN LEONARD, in respect to which this Court retains jurisdiction.
The effective date of this corrected order is February 5, 2010.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 26, 2010 /s/ Gary A. Feess,
Judge of the United States District Court — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.3.118.138 (
talk)
17:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is the correct Noticeboard for this. If it isn't please forgive me and I will move it.
The Kevin Garn article is being used by User:Nottoohappy as a wp:Coatrack to attack the LDS Church. His edits have been reverted numbersous times, and he has been warned against these types of edits, but the user has been repeatedly reinserted his claims into that article such as " No action was taken as the sexual abuse of underage women is a tradition in the LDS Church". In tone and claims made, this also appears to have some kind of a relationship to the previous issues that occured on the West Ridge Academy article.-- ARTEST4ECHO ( talk/ contribs) 19:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Misti Traya ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
No sources listed. reads like it was written by subject or subject's friend. contains trivia and not much noteworthy information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.184.240 ( talk) 22:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The Stacey Q article is extremely long, wordy, contains way too many obscure details, POV, and the subject of the article was known primarily in the 1980's for one hit single. I think other editors need to to trim a little fat off of it because it's overwhelmingly exhaustive and impossible to read and digest in it's current form. Thank you. 208.54.86.246 ( talk) 04:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Tim Street ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article seems to have been written by subject, and reads as an advertisement. It contains much more information than would seem to be necessary when compared to other articles about similar persons, and does not seem to achieve the general notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosaley ( talk • contribs) 21:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Subrata Roy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Regarding removal content "2G spectrum..." in Article "Subrata Roy"
Since the concerned matter is sub-judice, i.e. pending before court of law, any vexatious or biased comment or accusation causing damage to the image and reputation of an individual in lieu of any court verdict against the said individual, amounts to a criminal offence of Defamation under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. All persons who draft, publish, or aid and assist in drafting or publishing any such defamatory content are liable to be prosecuted in the court of law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.113.103.104 ( talk) 08:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I found it via wp:LIVINGDEAD on plwiki and I found death date, no ref, external links (even letters are unreadable for me "没有找到相关内容,您也许对下面内容感兴趣"), BLP notice and talkpage and death date. No google data but is is ulikely that she is alive (born in 1903). What should I do? Bulwersator ( talk) 11:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Johnny Antonelli ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Johnny Antonelli's skills DID NOT suddenly diminsh leading to his retirement. I spoke to him on 6/23/11, and this is what he stated: Mr. Antonelli retired at 32 years old because he grew tired of the traveling. He was offered a contract by the expansion New York Mets but turned it down. He simply did not want to travel anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maphfa ( talk • contribs) 11:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Sean Kugler attended DeSales Catholic High School and graduated in 1984. The school is located in Lockport, NY and not in Geneva, NY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.101.222.130 ( talk) 18:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Fiona Graham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
DAJF is constantly reediting the profile of Fiona Graham - Sayuki - to write in that she is no longer working, and other things that are unfounded. As a living person, this affects her career and is unwarranted. Other editors have cited from newspaper and valid sources that she is, in fact, working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.22.90.82 ( talk) 23:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Jose Antonio Vargas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article subject revealed in an article that he was an "undocumented immigrant", his phrasing. An IP editor has repeatedly tried to recast this term, and have included BLP violations in edit summaries. Subject has not been charged with a crime in this regard, much less convicted. Another editor added a category that is similarly problematic. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 06:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
← I agree with Rob here - BLP policy does indeed favor using less attacking, NPOV terminology, and "undocumented" is clearly less POV than "illegal". There are 2 IPs who seem to be single-purpose accounts editing with an agenda - see the edit summaries for these edits: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. Tvoz/ talk 23:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have started an RfC at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#RfC: undocumented immigrant or illegal immigrant. Cunard ( talk) 01:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a completely different issue from the one regarding this article already raised above, so I am listing it separately to avoid confusing the two. The subject of this page has published idiosyncratic theories about the Basque language. After (not very objectively) stating the theories, several people insist on adding this:
It is a strong opinion that the subject's theory is bunk, in the voice of the article, with no citation. I tried to calmly explain on the talk page that opinions have to be sourced, and that negative opinions about living people really really have to be sourced. But all I'm getting is argument like that the opinion is "uncontroversial among linguists". Can someone please explain the rules to these people? Zero talk 10:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Paleolithic cave wall signs contradict much of the linguists dogma and even dates of Americas peopling.Should you “linguists”(lawyers)try to defamate and destroy Genevieve von Petzinger? [17] Iberomesornix ( talk) 13:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Trigaranus,you have forgotten the work of John Bengtson,the late Sergei Anatolyevich Starostin and Merritt Ruhlen.All of them relate Basque language with Dene Caucasian languages including Basque[ [18]].I will add the proper information these week.However,this is not a matter of a BLP ,thus I will put most of the staff in one or two lines:those supporters and those who are against.In addition,most of what A A-V has proposed had already been proposed before without such a detail,i.e.: [19].This is because I do not believe that you are against A-V because his Basque language work,but because another unknown matter,particularly after your sudden twist to defamate A-V with spurious legal matters. A-V is respected by all geneticians.He has written many papers (more than 320)on it and you focus his BLP on just 2 papers.Scientific reviewers and A-V geneticists fellows have accepted all his work ,except Palestinian paper and Greek paper in WP (both of them were peer reviewed,also).We must emphasize that the main results of both papers have been repeated by other laboratories (as specified on the Greek one in WP,but not with Palestinian one).I will have to summarize this also and put Mike Hammer and other results in Palestinians.(COPY) Symbio04 ( talk) 23:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we have some attention from uninvolved administrators please? Zero talk 01:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
About a year ago someone created a redirect for the article Paulson & Co to the BLP John Paulson. [21] This seems inappropriate to me. If others agree and will advise me on how to undue the redirect, I will re-create the Paulson & Co article and remove info about the company that is currently in the BLP. Comments? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 14:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Craig Thomson (footballer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Mr Thomson is a Scottish footballer who was recently placed on the sex offenders register after some questionable online conversations with underage girls. My question is, is there too much about it in the article? Specifically, should it be mentioned in the lede? Thanks. doomgaze (talk) 17:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Lisa Raitt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I'm going offline right now - any chance someone could have a peek at this article. Someone has pinged me about it and said the content needs work or is biased; I think there is a point there but don't have time to review the material :) -- Errant ( chat!) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
The entry on Andy Cave is a piece that - IMHO - is a summing up all the positive and good about this climber (must be said, he's a person of some name). The history shows it's been built up by only very few editors, and especially User:Elaine bull solely focus on this article. It's a [self-]promotional article in essence and as I cant find the correct template [which I'm always having troubles with], I'd like to know whether insertion of the following one; {{vfd-sp}} would be correct, or whether you'd suggest another template. [And does one stuff that on the page or on the talk page?] Qwrk ( talk) 21:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Mr. G. Appasami was born in Pondicherry, India in 1980. He received his Master of Science degree in Mathematics, Master of Computer Applications degree and Master of Technology degree in Computer Science and Engineering from Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. He received his Master of Philosophy in Computer Science from Alagappa University, Karaikudi, India.Currently he is faculty in Dr. Pauls Engineering College, Villupuram and affiliated to Anna University of Technology Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. He is a life member of Indian Society for Technical Education, Computer Society of India, International Association of Computer Science and Information Technology (Singapore) and International Association of Engineers. He has published more papers in national/international journals and conference proceedings. His Area of interests includes Network Security, image processing and web technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.102.195.186 ( talk) 08:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Pasquale Conte ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
much of the information in your article with regard to pasquale conte are unsubstantiated allegations and defamatory. I believe most of the information that is incorrect has been placed by his younger brother who his is bitter towards. pasquale conte jr. you may contact me to clarify anything you wish at [removed email] Other websites with erroneous information are not considered to be valid sources. passing along information you know to be untrue does not validate it in any way . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.75.11.61 ( talk) 20:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I was hoping some other editors could look at the last paragraph of this article regarding recent events. Three sources are cited but when you follow the sources, they use very vague language like "suspected" or it was the opinion of those present.... Plus the sources are not very high quality to begin with. It seems like the report of a rumor. Is it sufficient for BLP? Bluebonnet460 ( talk) 00:31, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Florian Witulski has made no significant or original contribution to his field. He is purely an inexperienced citizen journalist desperate for attention. His biography should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.33.129 ( talk) 20:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a minor dispute at the above article. The article at present gives the hometown of the band, a very small town in Australia. This is independently and reliably sourced and has been publically released on several occasions (see [22] and [23]). In my opinion, the information is reliably sourced, encyclopedic in nature and non-controversial. Rowie235 ( talk · contribs) has removed the name of the town on several occasions, citing his/her (good faith) concern that it is an invasion of privacy and may put members of the band at risk, considering their age (the youngest is 12) and the size of the town. See here for more detail on his/her concerns. The advice/mediation of a third party would be useful. Cheers, Mattinbgn ( talk) 03:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate the time taken to discuss this matter. I will contact the band and ask them to resolve it either through their own means or through my account (they don't have a wiki account).-- Rowie235 ( talk) 05:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
The Joe Banzhaf III article, absurdly, ends in 1981. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.202.95 ( talk) 00:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Very poorly written and no citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.249.31 ( talk) 02:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. The above article, while reasonably well referenced, appears to have a less-than-neutral tone to it. The general theme is negative and as such I think it could use some other eyes on it to ensure neutrality. All help appreciated. Thanks. The Rambling Man ( talk) 08:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Chris Gregg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Firstly would question his notability for Wikipedia inclusion. Secondly article seems to be self-promotional, particularly regarding his current company. Suggest deletion. regards, jwdd27
In his Bio, Steve Forrest was killed by Matt Dillon twice....once as "Mannon" and once again n the Gunsmoke movie, again as Mannon.
But, he was also killed one other time, 3 times in total, in "The Brothers". He Played the part of Cord Wrecken, shot by Matt Dillin in the Long Branch as he threatened Miss Kitty.
Bud Weisbrod — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.156.232.166 ( talk) 20:19, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Michael Cherney ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Another editor wants the following information in this (already controversial) article:
Several leaked US diplomatic cables from the US Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria, mention Cherney. One describes him as a "notorious Russian crime figure" as well as a "Russian mobster". Continuing, it suggests that Cherney has "maintained influence over a number of companies by transferring ownership to Batkov" including PFC Levski Sofia and the Standardt newspaper. A second cable on the influence of Bulgarian organised crime in the cournty's football teams claims that Todor Batkov,the President of PFC Levski Sofia is "the proxy and front-man for the infamous Russian-Israeli businessman Michael Cherney". A third cable reports that Cherney "was expelled from Bulgaria in 2000 on the grounds of threatening national security".
In my view, the cables are either primary or secondary sources (depending on your point of view) and they lack context, including who exactly is making the accusations and why. I tried to keep the information out of the article, but the editor claims that other articles use these cables. See our Talk discussion here.
If these sources are not reliable for this purpose (my view), then we have clear BLP violations. I'd like other editors to take a look at this.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
An IP posted an RfC at Talk:Gregor_Robertson_(politician)#RFC:_negative_slant.3F regarding possible BLP issues in article Gregor_Robertson_(politician). (I'm not the RfC creator: I'm just cross-posting here to get more publicity). -- Noleander ( talk) 01:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
The article on Rajiva Wijesinha has been maliciously edited on 6/24/2011. In the second paragraph first line the word president has been replaced with "dictator". In para 5 line 1 the word "transvestite" has been inserted to describe Rajiva. These are obviously libelous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.152.248 ( talk) 03:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
A second opinion is needed of the article, following my copy-editing. (I have asked also for help at WikiProject Law.) Kiefer. Wolfowitz 20:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Martin Halstead ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Can someone have a look over this article and give it some TLC (it may even need deleting). I don't have time but a cursory glance shouts "help". Varsity Express is part of the related issues. Cheers all. -- Errant ( chat!) 21:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Bill Casselman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am William Gordon Casselman. details removed
Upon discovering a biographical Wiki item about myself and my works,that contained faulty entries, incomplete publication lists, various mistakes, I corrected them, only to have all the errors re-inserted.
The first report suggested strongly that I was either dead or no longer writing. That is deleterious to my career. That is one of the three requiasites to launch libel.
As the Wiki entry was called a biography of Bill Casselman, I added a publicly attested short biography from my website and from the author copy of all my third-party published books. But some arrogant editor, without so much as emailing me, has removed all the information I added, plus RE-INSERTED his or her mistakes. One of the things I did was merely put in the date of publication of all my books. Those dates were removed.
The utter snotty no-knowingness of the editor who first wrote and then removed all my corrections simply takes my breath away. I would ask you to insert all the edits I painstakingly inserted into a faulty biographical sketch that strongly hinted I was sitting somewhere drooling in a padded Alzheimer's chair, when in fact I am busy correcting my 15th book for American publication.
Therefore what your bizarre Wiki rules suggest is that some editor who has never contacted me knows more about my life than I do!!!
Out-fucking-rageous.
Please put my corrections back into the Wiki piece.
Bill Casselman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.12.163.48 ( talk • contribs)
Freedom Flotilla II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A little while ago I scanned through our Freedom Flotilla II article, where I chanced upon the follow -
The following two articles were given as references.
The issue is, the JPost cites the Telegraaf as the source of its information, while the Telegraaf cites an unnamed "intelligence source". So basically the information is coming from some nameless, faceless spokesperson for the Israeli government.
Thinking this was clearly inappropriate, I deleted it, only to have my revision undone by User:Epeefleche, who insists that since Telegraaf and JPost are WP:RS, the material is actually "well sourced".
I think it should be relatively obvious to anyone who examines the sources that keeping the material as is makes WP a mouthpiece for some unknown "intelligence source", which is pretty clearly not good practice.
On another note, following my edit and Epee's undo, Epeefleche actually started a Amin Abu Rashid page. Epee has a rather long history of tendentious editing on Israel-Palestine articles. Anyone feel that Epee's creative manipulation of sources might rise to the level of arbitration? NickCT ( talk) 14:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Sword of St. Michael ( talk · contribs) has added a number of catholic priests and others who committed child abuse to categories such as Category:LGBT people from Australia and Category:LGBT people from Ireland. While these individuals abused boys, I don't see anything in the articles to indicate that they identified as homosexual. This seems like an attempt to use wikipedia to make a point. The user has been doing something similar by labeling certain sources he doesn't like as Jewish [24]. GabrielF ( talk) 14:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
As regards the adding of sexual criminals to a cat, that is also not something we do here as I have seen. A person committing a rape can go into the rapist cat but a person committing a gay rape doesn't belong in the LGBT cats as they would require self identification with that group as per WP:BLPCAT - or whichever that guideline is. Off2riorob ( talk) 15:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
( edit conflict) Not only do they have to self-identify as being gay, but their sexual orientation has to be related to their notability. Otherwise, it violates WP:BLPCAT. I think it's virtually impossible to argue that the sexual orientation of an abuser of same-sex children is related to his notability. If that were so, then the sexual orientation of heterosexual child molesters would be related to their notability. The categories should be removed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Recently, the subject Bernard-Henri Lévy has been under attack in the MSM and on blogs because he has stood by his friend, Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Somebody in a major blog is citing this article and suggesting BHL is a fraud.
Since I am a newcomer to WIKI editing and not an expert in this field, can an experienced editor review this article? I have neither the chops nor the facility to do this on my own.
I do not know the subject and have no financial or personal interest thereon. PietrH ( talk) 20:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Ismail Darbar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Person is posting material based on articles that cite rumors and anonymous sources. I removed once and has been re-added. I do not want to start an edit war. [26]] also on [27] ‡ MAHEWA ‡ • talk 03:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Lewinsky (neologism) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I deleted an article that appears to violate WP:BLP and blocked the editor who created it, an account created today with only this one article as edits. Please weigh in here. Dreadstar ☥ 23:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Now at AFD - Off2riorob ( talk) 03:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewinsky (neologism) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Ferial Haffajee ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello I am trying to make a change to the biography of Ferial Haffajee. I have already amended her wikipedia profile but can't seem to edit her facebook wiki profile. It describes her as 'non-white' which she objects to. I need to change the 'non-white' to Black. How do I do this so that it changes all wiki linked profiles of her, not just the wikipedia one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saritaranchod ( talk • contribs) 06:47, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Shahid Malik ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch is suffering from a long standing dispute by multiple parties and really needs a look though from neutral parties. Brandon ( talk) 09:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Larry Graham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Larry Graham article states that Graham converting Prince to Jehova's Witness narrowed his world view and ruined his career... the following sentence: "Larry Graham introduced Prince to his brand of religion and Prince has never been the same since. In fact, the music he has released signals the end of a career that had had so much potential. Larry Graham should no longer be a member of the New Power Generation," is clearly opinion and is not backed up by references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.74.26.3 ( talk) 11:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
John Varty ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Certain editors purge my contributions to John Varty. Their contributions are defamatory Tigeralert ( talk) 13:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Andy Gallinagh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I find the opening paragraph disgusting. Andy Gallinagh has never been referred to as 'the spastic one' nor shows qualities of being down syndrome.
I find it appalling that down syndromes have now been referred to as 'spastics'- in this article. This statement is dishonest and is a complete violation of Andy Gallinaghs' profile.
It is a disgrace that this has been given such easy access to world wide viewing.
Andy Gallinagh is in the light of fame and I appreciate that all press/opinions/statements, will differ in style and positivity. However, this prejudice statement not only affects peoples feelings but is invasion of Andy Gallinaghs' rights to honest press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.204.143 ( talk) 21:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
United States and state terrorism ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Chomsky himself has been criticized for supporting Hezbollah, an organization designated by the United States as a terrorist group. "Citing with approval a journalist's observation that Hezbollah 'is not a terror organization,' Chomsky explained that the terrorist who blew up 243 U.S. Marines in Lebanon and murdered untold citizens of Israel was only engaging in 'legitimate resistance' against an oppressor and 'avoids striking civilians except in retaliation for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilians.'" [28]
Does this quote violate BLP? It is sourced to an editorial by David Horowitz in FrontPage Magazine ("Noam Chomsky's love affair with Nazis"). [29] Horowitz is the one providing the criticism. Is the source reliable, are the opinions expressed notable, is the wording neutral and is it relevant to the article? TFD ( talk) 01:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
After reviewing BLP, I realize that the reference may have been unduly inflammatory. Please note I toned it down to better comply with policy. I'd appreciate your feedback. Scaleshombre ( talk) 02:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
What about this?
During a televised discussion about terrorism, former U.S. Secretary of Education William Bennett noted that Chomsky is "the man ... who said that the reports of atrocities by the Khmer Rouge were grossly exaggerated. ... Go through the Chomsky work, line by line, argument by argument, and you will see this is a man who has made a career out of hating America and out of trashing the record of this country." [30] (Source: CNN transcript [31])
TFD ( talk) 02:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Gabriel, it's a good cite. Kudos. Scaleshombre ( talk) 05:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I think the key point is to explicitly address Chomsky's ideas about the US and state terrorism. What's missing in the Horowitz quote is a sentence from the source that explicitly makes that link. Something on the order of: "Horowitz argues that Chomsky's definition of terrorism is biased [or incorrect, or whatever he says], because he sees Hezbollah as a legitimate resistance group rather than a terrorist organization." (I don't know if Horowitz says this exactly, but my point is that this is how it should be framed.) If its framed as a discussion of Chomsky's ideas on the US and state terrorism than BLP is much less of an issue. Horowitz is not the most sober source but I think he's fine if he's used as a way to explain why people might disagree with Chomsky. A more mainstream counterpoint would be preferable but there's nothing wrong with using an op-ed to establish that the writer disagrees with Chomsky. GabrielF ( talk) 04:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Amy Locane ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'd be grateful if someone could have a look at Amy Locane and give some clarity on whether the level of detail that an editor is putting in is appropriate within the terms of BLP. I've warned a user for 3RR, and I'll watch the page and protect if necessary. Thanks. Ged UK 13:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Luciana Berger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Some third party views on the recent edit war at the article would be welcomed at the article talk page, to establish consensus. Thanks. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Josh Groban ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
24.12.127.43 ( talk · contribs) has been persistently adding the unsourced (and as far as I can see unsourceable) name of his alleged girl friend to this article, and alleged past girlfriends to other articles. They have continued this despite multiple reverts by other editors (four times today alone) [32] and multiple warnings on their talk page, including a final warning. Perhaps a short block might concentrate the mind? Voceditenore ( talk) 15:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Matt Damon ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
someone wrote some really bad stupid stuff about Matt and it should be removed a.s.a.p., I am not a member so I am just informing Wikipedia about this bad information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.69.133.221 ( talk) 02:28, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Antonio Arnaiz-Villena ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Akerbeltz,Dumu Eduba,Kwamikagami and Trigaranus are spoiling Antonio Arnaiz-Villena biography with their opinions as pointed out bu User:Zero .They were apparent linguists that later become interested only just on the false legal accusations that rised against Arnaiz-Villena after publishing a forbidden(!) genetics paper on Palestinians.This is now in the page.They do not let clarify what WP asks for update or references. Symbio04 ( talk) 17:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I've bowed out from editing the article for the moment (although not because of Iberomesornix's absurd comments). I'm awaiting the outcome of the SPI investigation before doing anything else. It would still help, though, if other editors would take an interest in the article.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 02:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Tzvi Erez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Additional review of this new article, with a keen eye towards BLP issues, would be appreciated. The subject was charged with various fraud crimes, but the charges were dropped due to a shortage of court time and judges, so he was never actually convicted of anything. At this time it appears to be a case of WP:UNDUE, with a couple sentences related to his work as a pianist, and the remainder focusing on the ponzi scheme and its fall-out. If the crime is really the notable nugget in all of this, then perhaps the article should be moved to reflect that? Other opinions would be appreciated. Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 15:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Jay Severin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having problems at the Jay Severin article with neutrality/undue weight issues and a nascent edit war. The original article didn't follow any wikipedia format and seemed (to me) to consist of a bloated lede followed by a list of the subject's misdeeds (he's a recently-fired talk radio "shock jock" from the Boston area). I posted a comment in the talk section of the article indicating an intent to correct the perceived deficiencies, then re-formatted the article in my sandbox to conform to the biography template, pared back the criticisms section, and created the missing sections. In the absence of comments rejecting my assessment, I made the changes about six days later. A possible (likely) edit war is brewing between myself and Xerxesnine over the changes. My opinion is that the original article was well-referenced but placed undue weight on the Severin's tenure in Boston and specifically on the controversies he generated as a radio talk show host. If someone neutral could drop by and evaluate the situation, it could help Xerxesnine and I to reach an amicable consensus. TreacherousWays ( talk) 10:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with the undue weight tag, which has been restored. My problem has always been with the absurd amount of brand new unsourced material in the rewrite. Xerxesnine ( talk) 19:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Aaadietya Pandey ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have been trying to improve this BLP, lots of dead links and promotional stuff. Other than a few brief mentions in Times of India articles I cannot find any good sources for this person. There also doesn't seem to be an article in Hindi for him, which is strange for an Indian person. How to go forward with this one? MakeSense64 ( talk) 16:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Adrian Lewis Morgan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am Adrian's Agent and have removed the details about his Personal Life as these were not added by Adrian and he prefers that this information be kept private. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinorhilton ( talk • contribs) 16:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Rybka ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Vasik Rajlich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
In light of plagiarism accusations, do we have a clear BLP policy of assuming innocence until proven otherwise by a court of law (not championship)? Artem Karimov ( talk) 19:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Article about an awared (which may or may not be notable, but that's a separate issue) which lists a number of names of those awarded it but has no references at all. Santosham Film Awards is similar except it is mainly a list of daughter articles which are the articles including names, not all unsourced. Dougweller ( talk) 08:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Raymond Hoser ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has had original research added to the effect that he is the sole author of a journal - for which the editor simply examined the onlne journal. I suggest that this is the essence of OR, that any contentious claims in a BLP must be sourced, but I am met with
Is WP:BLP now irrelevant when an editor wishes to state that a journal is a "vanity jurnal" but can not find an actual RS making that claim? Cheers. Collect ( talk) 11:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
QED: Claims based on such OR and not based on a reliable secondary source must be removed from BLPs. That is "da rules" SBHB. Sorry if you dislike them <g>. Cheers Collect ( talk) 11:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Kristin Bauer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I hope an admin can look into this, I wasn't sure whether to post this here or at the COI noticeboard or inappropriate username. But there has been an ongoing dispute about the subjects date of birth - year. Now it has been changed by user:fifteenminutespr and a message left on the talk page. There is a Fifteen Minutes PR firm: http://www.fifteenminutes.com/ I have changed the date back a few times, from an IP's edit, but I"m ready to let someone else take a look. Bluebonnet460 ( talk) 19:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
The cited source does not mention her year or date of birth. I've looked her up in the biographical reference work Contemporary Theatre, Film and Television, and that cites November 26, 1973 as her date of birth. Even if this RS is incorrect, we can't declare it wrong and another date correct based on conjecture. I'll refrain from inserting the 1973 date into the article for now, but I've removed the 1966 date as unsourced. Gamaliel ( talk) 22:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Gene Melchiorre ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The statement in Melchiorre's article contains an erroneous statement, namely that he scored 71 points in an NIT Tournament game. According to the Bradley University Sports Information Office, Melchiorre never scored as many as 30 points while playing for Bradley. Also, according to the NIT, the record for most points scored in one game is held by George Mikan. His record is in the low 40's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BradleyProf ( talk • contribs) 20:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Glenn Mulcaire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This seems like a textbook case of BLP1E, so I redirected it to News of the World phone hacking affair, but I was reverted by none other than Jimbo Wales. I'm a bit surprised by this so I thought I'd ask BLP regulars for their thoughts. Gamaliel ( talk) 15:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Ridiculous comment posted by someone... In CAPITAL LETTERS under 'Career as Prosecutor' Please Remove! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shalimar777 ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Described in first line as "an Ass Activist", with the word "Ass" hyperlinked to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spamhole ( talk • contribs) 22:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
The article cites no outside sources whatsoever. It needs to be cleaned up. It has a random quotation section citing "he has been heard to say" and the only thing that actually is a citation directs to the pages, where Yoshimitsu Yamada either is a boss, owner, or board member. I suspect it was written by someone very close to him in the organization that this man owns if not by Yoshimitsu himself.
None of the claims in this article are verified and frankly the article also lacks in notability. It should be either cleaned up or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.184.39 ( talk) 04:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Aelita Andre ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, I'm writing here because I want to clarify a few things regarding a recent series of edits made on an article that I wrote and am maintaining, Aelita Andre. Earlier today, User:Cramyourspam made four successive edits to the article, the end result of which was:
(1) The addition of critical information about the article's subject sourced only by a private blog.
(2) The addition of an autobiography tag justified with a statement that I, the article's author, "seem" close to the subject because there isn't really anything negative about her in the article. I contested this on the article's talk page, because it isn't true and because nearly every sentence of the article is followed by 1 to 3 inline citations from reliable sources, so the accusation was sort of ridiculous.
Because this user made four uninterrupted edits in a row, I undid them with four uninterrupted edits in a row. I'm afraid now that someone might see this as more than 3 edits in a 24-hour period, but this was actually a single edit in 4 parts (since the other user did not edit between my 4 edits). Additionally, these edits were done in order to remove contentious material in a BLP. Curiously, this user's page explicitly states that edits to the user's personal talk page are not welcome. Because I wanted to draw the user's attention to the article's talk page so we could have a discussion, I simply reverted the next edit that he (or she) made with an edit summary stating "Cramyourspam, I undid this only to let you know I want to talk about this on the Talk Page since you don't want messages on your page." If anyone here is interested in the full chronology of events and in everything that was said on the article's talk page, please take a look. I hope for two things from you:
(1) I'd like some form of confirmation that the situation is understood in case anyone sees, at a quick glance, that I made the three uninterrupted reverts in a row, and in case that person doesn't notice that these are all really a single change undone in the same consecutive steps in which they were created in the first place. Moreover, I want to point out immediately that the motivation behind the edits was to remove contentious, poorly sourced information in a BLP. I strongly encourage anyone interested to view this page in detail.
(2) Although an uninvolved rollbacker chanced upon the page, reverted it to its original state (what it was before Cramyourspam's first edit), and helped to resolve the issue by now, I would like some feedback on how I handled the situation so I can improve my response in similar situations in the future. Of course, if you don't have time to do that, I understand.
Thank you for your time, Armadillopteryx talk 02:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Mark Hackel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Mark Hackel is an elected official whose father was convicted of a serious felony. I've been having a disagreement with another user about the issue; he wishes to include this information in Mark's article while I think it should not be. The talk page and article history should tell the tale more fully, but in short I believe the conviction is not sufficiently relevant to Mark's notability to be included and is merely inflammatory, which as I understand the policy would make it a BLP issue. Could we get some eyes more familiar with the nuances of BLP than I to see if it actually is or not? Imyourfoot ( talk) 20:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
Article has a section on him "possibly" being a secret Roman Catholic. Per prior discussions on this and related pages, I enquire as to whether such speculation on religion is proper in a BLP. Collect ( talk) 12:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
The nonsense has been removed ( diff), but in case there is any doubt, no article should record such speculation with such weak sources and nonexistent attempt to suggest the material is of any significance other than fun gossip. It was ok for the media to report the speculation at the time, but it is not suitable for a bio unless there is some serious suggestion of the material's veracity (and in that sense, the sources are pathetic). Johnuniq ( talk) 11:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
The biography of Ron Freeman, Olympic athlete, incorrectly confuses him with an individual of the same name who was a teacher at Monte Vista High School and died in 2011. Ron Freeman, the athlete, is still alive, and this erroneous report of his death is causing great concern among his friends and classmates from Elizabeth, NJ. An error as severe as this cannot wait for the vetting cycle to allow me to be able to edit the page myself.
This is the current entry: Ronald ("Ron") J. Freeman II (born June 12, 1947) is a former American athlete, winner of gold medal in 4x400 m relay at the 1968 Summer Olympics.
Born in Elizabeth, New Jersey, Ron Freeman was third in 400 m and ran the second leg in the American 4x400 m relay team, which won the gold medal with a new world record of 2.56.11.
Following his Olympic career, Freeman taught Physical Education and World History at Monta Vista High School. He died of a heart attack in 2011.
The following is from MercuryNews.com:
Ron "Screamin" Freeman
Resident of Los Altos
Passed away suddenly on Jan. 21. He was 52. Ron was a cornerstone in the South Bay water polo community. He spent the last 30 years teaching and coaching at Monta Vista High School in Cupertino. He was instrumental in the USA Water Polo Olympic Development Program, De Anza Water Polo Club, and the De Anza-Cupertino Aquatics program. He was also involved with the Junior Olympics, serving as team lead on the 1997 U.S. World Champion Team.
For more about Ron go to the Face Book page "Ron Freeman was my water polo coach and History teacher".
Ron is survived by his mother and stepfather Miriam and Ken Clark, his brothers Richard, Dean, John, and Wayne Freeman, and his sister Cathleen Bridenstein.
Ron's Memorial will be at Monta Vista High School gym Friday, Feb. 18 at 3 p.m. In lieu of flowers donations can be made to the Ron Freeman Memorial Fund, care of Monta Vista High School, 21840 McClellan Rd., Cupertino, CA 95014. Published in San Jose Mercury News/San Mateo County Times on February 3, 2011
Please immediately correct this error. Thank you
96.41.104.165 (talk) 05:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Moved here, originally posted on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons, in order to bring it to more people's attention to fix if needed. Jnorton7558 ( talk) 07:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
The article on the controversial Singaporean celebrity blogger Xiaxue has a history of BLP problems. I recently rewrote the article and aim to make it my 7th GA. However, I am not very familiar with the details of the BLP policy, so I would like my version to be checked for BLP compliance. If there are any violations, please assume good faith, correct them and explain them to me (and should you need any clarification regarding facts or sources, feel free to ask). Thanks! -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 08:59, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
place of birth is Amman - Jordan and not Syria, and was born to Jordanian parents and not Syrian parents — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.249.24.194 ( talk) 09:38, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Richard Granger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Newly-created article which appears to have a very negative slant. Subject is the former head of NHS Connecting for Health, responsible for introducing an IT system which has come in for criticism. I'm concerned about the general neutrality and tone of the article. January ( talk) 10:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
John Anderson, 3rd Viscount Waverley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has an editor seeking to add material which is unreferenced and unsourced, and quite contentious. Romoval of such at [1] was reverted, second removal was met with [2] and the unhelpful edit summary of Removal of all non-referenced content, as exemplified by Collect. The specific prior claims (?) were defamatory, and the current claim about a minor appears afoul of WP:BLP (not copied here as BLP applies here as well!). More eyes needed - as this edoitor seems a tad determined on the issue of father and son. Collect ( talk) 16:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Dealt with by various people at AN/I, thanks to all concerned. Sergeant Cribb ( talk) 06:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Johnny Tri Nguyen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An IP keeps re-inserting which apartment the article subject lives in. Thoughts? 28bytes ( talk) 01:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
(move from BLPN talk) -- J N 466 16:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm seeking consensus here as to whether we should be linking to the personal website Dan Savage set up about Rick Santorum, the former senator for Pennsylvania. For those of you not familiar with the background, Savage is an American freelance columnist who set up a website intended to spread a vulgar definition of Santorum's surname. He did this in response to comments Santorum made about homosexuality that the gay community and others found offensive.
We have several articles that refer to the controversy, including Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The question is whether we should be linking to Savage's website directly, or whether we should only cite secondary sources that refer to it. WP:BLPSPS is clear on this point, namely that self-published sources must not be cited for material about living persons. But when I remove the site, I'm being reverted, [3] [4] so fresh input would be appreciated. SlimVirgin TALK| CONTRIBS 15:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject ( see below). ... External links about living persons, whether in BLPs or elsewhere, are held to a higher standard than for other topics. Questionable or self-published sources should not be included in the "Further reading" or "External links" sections of BLPs, and when including such links in other articles make sure the material linked to does not violate this policy. ... In general, do not link to websites that contradict the spirit of this policy or violate the External links guideline. Where that guideline is inconsistent with this or any other policy, the policies prevail.
"In biographies of living people, material available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all, either as sources or via external links. External links in biographies of living persons must be of high quality and are judged by a higher standard than for other articles. Do not link to websites that are not fully compliant with this guideline or that contradict the spirit of WP:BLP."
Might I suggest this discussion be moved to the actual noticeboard, instead of the talkpage? -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Edit conflict
The policy is clear on this point: "Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject ..." See WP:BLPSPS. SlimVirgin TALK| CONTRIBS 17:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
What, exactly, is the point of not including the link if we're including the URL? Is it to make it purposefully inconvenient for our readers, who will wonder why we can't master the idea of hyperlinks? That seems to me to be the AGF explanation, and the other ones I can think of would probably get me sanctioned if I posted them. The idea that we can mention the name of the site, mention its URL, but can't link it because OMG it might violate BLP then is wikilawyering at its most despicable, and contains not one shred of common sense. This seems like a clear place where a combination of WP:COMMONSENSE and WP:IAR need to apply. // ⌘macwhiz ( talk) 18:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
*ROTFL!!! "You probably could not completely understand the topic without seeing the website." BWAHAAHAHAHAHAH! That's the funniest thing I've read in ages! ROTFL! Oh, man, would you mind coming over to help fight the
NFCC Wars?. Your input is just priceless! lol!
Dreadstar
☥
20:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Responses, I've been gone: BLP applies here to statements about Santorum or Savage... but not to discussion of the campaign itself. We aren't writing a BLP, and BLP applies only peripherally. The policy "when including such links in other articles make sure the material linked to does not violate this policy" is very clear. So maybe we should not link directly. However, the spirit of that policy is that we should not write "spreadingsantorum.com" either. But that is nonsensical in this case, so we should
ignore it, perhaps to the extent of direct linking, though that's not strictly necessary in order to write a proper article. (A direct link to the site will not effect Google because of the nofollow property.)
"And who is the subject of Campaign for "santorum" neologism? --Protonk" Why, no one: we're talking about a campaign. If not, then there is a major problem here, and I'll immediately delete 95% of this article.
"When the oversight isn't present we don't link to the source unless the source is writing about itself/himself/herself. --olive" I think we can safely say that in an article about the campaign, spreadingsantorum.com is writing about the campaign, and as part of the campaign is writing about itself. But this is confusing an article about the campaign with an article on Santorum. If we're writing an article on Santorum, then the site is not something we use. If we're writing about the campaign, then BLP is peripheral and anyway, the site is "about itself."
Anyway, what we have here is strained arguments about how we should not link to a site which is central to the subject of the article- the campaign. I believe we at least need to have the site mentioned in plain text, and that it is acceptable to have it as a link; and that there is no real difference between the two except convenience to the reader. Perhaps also, Wikipedia's reputation as a source which does not flinch for no reason from covering any subject impartially. Maybe we should not have this article, but those who feel this way (I will say it again) need to formulate their ideas as policy, or else appeals to inapplicable policy or emotion are not going to fly. I would definitely support such an attempt because even if it failed we would learn a great deal. BE——Critical__ Talk 02:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I think it's clear that the policy, literally applied, prohibits linking to the site. I think it's also clear that the policy is not meant to be for that sort of case and should not be interpreted literally. The ban on linking to self-published derogatory material is meant to apply when the link is used as a substitute for including the derogatory material in the article. If the article is about the existence of derogatory material, then this becomes a non-concern; the derogatory material is in the article anyway. Ken Arromdee ( talk) 19:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
It would be nice to get some uninvovled commentary on this. I realize half the Wiki has chimed in at some point or another, but I'm sure there are people who haven't who regularly work in BLP areas who might have something to say. Some fresh voices might be helpful here. Thanks. Griswaldo ( talk) 18:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Review article links to the WR website. The Encyclopedia Dramatica article links to mirrors of that semi-defunct website. Those websites also engage in crude or scatological attacks on living people. I don't see the difference. I've previously said that we shouldn't link to such sites, but if they're allowed then we should be consistent. Will Beback talk 20:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Is this an attempt to resurrect a dead proposal by creeping it up in a few cases (like santorum (neologism)) and then applying it to more general cases later? Sure feels like it. Once we disregard our dislike of Dan Savage's web site it becomes a simple matter of editorial decision making whether we should link to it, and there is no other reason not to. This is the primary website about the primary topic of the article. No brainer, link it. SchmuckyTheCat ( talk)
On Kate Bornstein's article, there is a pronoun dispute.
Kate Bornstein uses the gender neutral pronouns "ze" and "hir". This was changed twice, but reverted each time. Editors who edit hir's page keep using female pronouns even outside of the article even though ze actively uses the neutral pronouns and discusses this in hir's speaking engagements and books.
While this may seem like a small issue of technicalities, I cannot emphasize enough how offensive it is to not allow some one's preferred pronoun to be used. Especially with in Queer Studies - a field in which Bornstein plays a prominent roll.
For easy reference and both sides arguments, here is the talk page -- Sanctusorium ( talk) 03:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
The article Kreayshawn had major problems with vandalism, saying that she is "white trash", etc. I've tried to revert all of them, but I might have missed some. It seems like this article has been heavily vandalised recently, so I just wanted to give a heads up, and recommend that maybe someone go through the sources and make sure that everything is correct. I reverted to an older version that looked like it had less vandalism, but I still found a few problems. ~ Mesoderm ( talk) 07:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
It appears an unknown user has made defamatory/libelous posts about the son of the above. Although this has now been reversed by another user, it still shows up on the history page. Is there any way of permanently deleting the comments?
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Dave_Scully&action=historysubmit&diff=436183130&oldid=436183028
Done --
Floquenbeam (
talk)
18:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Horacio Gutiérrez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Additional eyes on this one please. A new editor has been turning it into a PR-style promo piece and has been reverted several times, including twice by me today. – ukexpat ( talk) 19:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
We need some input on a template change which occurred today. Without any prior discussion the "Template:Birth date and age" default was changed from "mf" to "df". this affects 100s of 1000s of articles all over wikipedia. Perhaps none more so than in this project. Let me add that I have no problem with the WP:BOLDness of this change but I do think that a) it should be changed back until b) a larger discussion comes to a consensus on this. The current discussion is here Template talk:Birth date and age#Current format. Thanks ahead of time for any input that members of this project can add. MarnetteD | Talk 21:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
User:Poyani ( contributions, edit count) restored contentious poorly sourced material to the talk page of CounterPunch, after I had redacted "[name removed], the Swedish feminist" to "[a] Swedish feminist".
My talk page discusses this event, and whether reliable sources name the complainant/victim: User_talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz#Rape_Complaintant_and_WP:BLP.
User:Poyani wrote that "I am going to mention this person's name on Julian Assenge's talk page. Feel free to file a report on BLP noticeboards. I want to test this.", so I alert BLPN now. User:Poyani added the name.
Please see the extensive discussion in your archives. 21:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Lifting a hand ... to help good, wise, or great, to bar that foul storm out, Kiefer. Wolfowitz 21:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Rick Hill ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is an individual or individuals have been repeatedly posting partisan and opinion based, false, information and removing facts about this person from his term in Congress. I think it is improper to be using Wikipedia as a forum for political rhetoric and hope this can be resolved.
Thank you.
Feona Bessemer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Febessemer ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a biographical page that is being defamed with political rhetoric. Please remove the page or lock it after a consensus on it's content is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Febessemer ( talk • contribs) 22:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Melissa Scott (pastor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
article is poorly sourced — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.23.179.144 ( talk) 22:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Michael Lissack ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is Michael Lissack. The article about me keeps getting re-edited to suggest that I pled guilty to charges which I DID NOT. I have put the correct record (with a link to the law itself) back several times and another editor keeps removing the link and changing the language back to words which I find to be inaccurate, libelous and defamatory. HELP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.203.10.194 ( talk) 17:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have done my best to take into account all the comments and still make things accurate. The parking ticket reference is out and there is just a straightforward reference to the civil violation and its case law. Per another comment I added the SEC sanction and provided both the link to the sanction itself and to the book chapter describing what happened. My issue was a simple one -- I never pled guilty to a crime and it is just hurtful and wrong to state that I did. Hopefully the full exchange has gotten all of this to a better place Michaellissack ( talk) 23:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have edited the passage about Lissack's guilty plea. First, I could find no support for him having pled guilty to a "civil violation". If I missed something, please show me. Second, the passage cited to primary sources for statutes for no good reason, as well as a blog for no good reason. I removed those references. I also added a sentence that states that Lissack was neither jailed nor fined based on his guilty plea, which was stated in one of the cited sources. As far as I can tell, the passage now conforms to the reliable sources that I left in.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 00:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
FYI: There is a discussion about this same issue going on at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Michael_Lissack_article_legal_claims ConcernedVancouverite ( talk) 00:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
HELP If you read the statute (which is why I had cited it) the very last line states clearly that second degree harassment is a violation. see http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/PEN0240.26_240.26.html the blog was cited as it explained very clearly that ALL VIOLATIONS are civilk not criminal see http://www.newyorkcriminallawyerblog.com/2009/02/criminal_law_101_defining_felo_1.html I have no problem witn taking responsibility for what I did but why does everyone here seem to insist that it is okay to imply I did much worse? I never pled guilty to any crime. Please put back the references which make that clear. (BTW the current rewrite otherwise reads much better than prior versions) Michaellissack ( talk) 02:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I must thank everyone. The article reads much better and I have been treated fairly. AND in less than 24 hours!! Thanks Michaellissack ( talk) 07:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Article seems to have been written by subject and reads as an advertisement. Following many of the references ultimately leads back to subject's website. Article seems to violate Biographies of Living Persons standards and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wraythe ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Glenn Leonard ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I had previously posted the accurate information that Glenn Leonard is under a permanent federal injunction which prohibits him from commercial use of the name "Temptations" in any manner. I posted the case number and docket number of that permanent injunction, which is a matter of public record. Accurate reporting of a public record cannot be libelous. That posting was removed and the article now reports that Glenn Leonard currently performs as the "Temptations Revue" -- which appears to be a violation of the express terms of the permanent injunction.
Case Title: Williams v. SBE etc., et al. Court: U.S. District Court, Central District of California Judge: Hon. Gary A. Feess Case Number: 07-CV-07006-GAF Case filed: 2007 Permanent Injunction Entered: 2/5/2010 (Docket #328) Corrected Permanent Injunction Entered: 3/26/10 (Docket #339)
Full Text of Corrected Permanent Injunction:
Upon the settlement agreement and stipulation of Plaintiff OTIS WILLIAMS and Defendant GLENN LEONARD, entry of permanent injunction is GRANTED, as follows:
Defendant GLENN LEONARD, his employees, officers, agents, attorneys, successors and assigns, and all those acting in active concert and/or participation with any of them, who shall receive actual notice of this Order, are hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from engaging in the following activities, or in any of them:
(1) Directly or indirectly infringing upon the goodwill associated with plaintiff’s service mark “The Temptations”;
(2) Directly or indirectly infringing upon the trade name “The Temptations” or using plaintiff’s trade name in any manner, including generally but not limited to advertising, promoting, performing, and/or exhibiting the services of defendant LEONARD or of anyone else that infringes said trade name;
(3) Engaging in any conduct that tends falsely to represent , or is likely to confuse, mislead, or deceive purchasers, defendant LEONARD’s customers, and/or members of the public believe, that the actions of defendant LEONARD, including the advertisement, promotion, performance, and/or exhibition of any performance or performers under the name “The Temptations,” or any similar incarnation of the name, are sponsored, approved, or licensed by plaintiff, or are in some way associated, affiliated, or connected with plaintiff and/or with “The Temptations”;
(4) Affixing, applying, annexing, or using in connection with the advertisement, promotion, performance, and/or exhibition of any performance or performers under the name “The Temptations,” or any similar incarnation of the name, a false description or representation, including words or false symbols tending to describe or represent such goods or services as being those of plaintiff;
(5) Diluting and/or infringing plaintiff’s trade name “The Temptations,” and/or damaging plaintiff’s goodwill, reputation, and business;
(6) Effecting assignments or transfers, granting purported licenses, forming new entities or associations, or utilizing any other means or device for the purpose of circumventing or otherwise avoiding the prohibitions set forth in paragraph (1) through (5), above.
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ P. 54 (b), the court hereby makes an express determination that there is no just reason for delay, and expressly directs entry of this judgment of permanent injunction, forthwith.
The Court further Orders that the counterclaim of GLENN LEONARD on file herein is dismissed forthwith, with prejudice.
The Court further Orders that the separate related action entitled Live Gold etc., et al., v. UMG etc., et al. on file in this District Court as Case No. 09-cv-00417 is likewise dismissed forthwith, with prejudice.
This Order is without prejudice as to the joint and several obligation of GLENN LEONARD in respect to this Court’s previous finding of contempt and award of sanctions thereon as against the said Defendant GLENN LEONARD, in respect to which this Court retains jurisdiction.
The effective date of this corrected order is February 5, 2010.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 26, 2010 /s/ Gary A. Feess,
Judge of the United States District Court — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.3.118.138 (
talk)
17:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is the correct Noticeboard for this. If it isn't please forgive me and I will move it.
The Kevin Garn article is being used by User:Nottoohappy as a wp:Coatrack to attack the LDS Church. His edits have been reverted numbersous times, and he has been warned against these types of edits, but the user has been repeatedly reinserted his claims into that article such as " No action was taken as the sexual abuse of underage women is a tradition in the LDS Church". In tone and claims made, this also appears to have some kind of a relationship to the previous issues that occured on the West Ridge Academy article.-- ARTEST4ECHO ( talk/ contribs) 19:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Misti Traya ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
No sources listed. reads like it was written by subject or subject's friend. contains trivia and not much noteworthy information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.184.240 ( talk) 22:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The Stacey Q article is extremely long, wordy, contains way too many obscure details, POV, and the subject of the article was known primarily in the 1980's for one hit single. I think other editors need to to trim a little fat off of it because it's overwhelmingly exhaustive and impossible to read and digest in it's current form. Thank you. 208.54.86.246 ( talk) 04:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Tim Street ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article seems to have been written by subject, and reads as an advertisement. It contains much more information than would seem to be necessary when compared to other articles about similar persons, and does not seem to achieve the general notability guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosaley ( talk • contribs) 21:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Subrata Roy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Regarding removal content "2G spectrum..." in Article "Subrata Roy"
Since the concerned matter is sub-judice, i.e. pending before court of law, any vexatious or biased comment or accusation causing damage to the image and reputation of an individual in lieu of any court verdict against the said individual, amounts to a criminal offence of Defamation under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. All persons who draft, publish, or aid and assist in drafting or publishing any such defamatory content are liable to be prosecuted in the court of law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.113.103.104 ( talk) 08:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I found it via wp:LIVINGDEAD on plwiki and I found death date, no ref, external links (even letters are unreadable for me "没有找到相关内容,您也许对下面内容感兴趣"), BLP notice and talkpage and death date. No google data but is is ulikely that she is alive (born in 1903). What should I do? Bulwersator ( talk) 11:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Johnny Antonelli ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Johnny Antonelli's skills DID NOT suddenly diminsh leading to his retirement. I spoke to him on 6/23/11, and this is what he stated: Mr. Antonelli retired at 32 years old because he grew tired of the traveling. He was offered a contract by the expansion New York Mets but turned it down. He simply did not want to travel anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maphfa ( talk • contribs) 11:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Sean Kugler attended DeSales Catholic High School and graduated in 1984. The school is located in Lockport, NY and not in Geneva, NY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.101.222.130 ( talk) 18:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Fiona Graham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
DAJF is constantly reediting the profile of Fiona Graham - Sayuki - to write in that she is no longer working, and other things that are unfounded. As a living person, this affects her career and is unwarranted. Other editors have cited from newspaper and valid sources that she is, in fact, working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.22.90.82 ( talk) 23:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Jose Antonio Vargas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article subject revealed in an article that he was an "undocumented immigrant", his phrasing. An IP editor has repeatedly tried to recast this term, and have included BLP violations in edit summaries. Subject has not been charged with a crime in this regard, much less convicted. Another editor added a category that is similarly problematic. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 06:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
← I agree with Rob here - BLP policy does indeed favor using less attacking, NPOV terminology, and "undocumented" is clearly less POV than "illegal". There are 2 IPs who seem to be single-purpose accounts editing with an agenda - see the edit summaries for these edits: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. Tvoz/ talk 23:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I have started an RfC at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#RfC: undocumented immigrant or illegal immigrant. Cunard ( talk) 01:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a completely different issue from the one regarding this article already raised above, so I am listing it separately to avoid confusing the two. The subject of this page has published idiosyncratic theories about the Basque language. After (not very objectively) stating the theories, several people insist on adding this:
It is a strong opinion that the subject's theory is bunk, in the voice of the article, with no citation. I tried to calmly explain on the talk page that opinions have to be sourced, and that negative opinions about living people really really have to be sourced. But all I'm getting is argument like that the opinion is "uncontroversial among linguists". Can someone please explain the rules to these people? Zero talk 10:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Paleolithic cave wall signs contradict much of the linguists dogma and even dates of Americas peopling.Should you “linguists”(lawyers)try to defamate and destroy Genevieve von Petzinger? [17] Iberomesornix ( talk) 13:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Trigaranus,you have forgotten the work of John Bengtson,the late Sergei Anatolyevich Starostin and Merritt Ruhlen.All of them relate Basque language with Dene Caucasian languages including Basque[ [18]].I will add the proper information these week.However,this is not a matter of a BLP ,thus I will put most of the staff in one or two lines:those supporters and those who are against.In addition,most of what A A-V has proposed had already been proposed before without such a detail,i.e.: [19].This is because I do not believe that you are against A-V because his Basque language work,but because another unknown matter,particularly after your sudden twist to defamate A-V with spurious legal matters. A-V is respected by all geneticians.He has written many papers (more than 320)on it and you focus his BLP on just 2 papers.Scientific reviewers and A-V geneticists fellows have accepted all his work ,except Palestinian paper and Greek paper in WP (both of them were peer reviewed,also).We must emphasize that the main results of both papers have been repeated by other laboratories (as specified on the Greek one in WP,but not with Palestinian one).I will have to summarize this also and put Mike Hammer and other results in Palestinians.(COPY) Symbio04 ( talk) 23:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we have some attention from uninvolved administrators please? Zero talk 01:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
About a year ago someone created a redirect for the article Paulson & Co to the BLP John Paulson. [21] This seems inappropriate to me. If others agree and will advise me on how to undue the redirect, I will re-create the Paulson & Co article and remove info about the company that is currently in the BLP. Comments? -- — Keithbob • Talk • 14:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Craig Thomson (footballer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Mr Thomson is a Scottish footballer who was recently placed on the sex offenders register after some questionable online conversations with underage girls. My question is, is there too much about it in the article? Specifically, should it be mentioned in the lede? Thanks. doomgaze (talk) 17:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Lisa Raitt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I'm going offline right now - any chance someone could have a peek at this article. Someone has pinged me about it and said the content needs work or is biased; I think there is a point there but don't have time to review the material :) -- Errant ( chat!) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
The entry on Andy Cave is a piece that - IMHO - is a summing up all the positive and good about this climber (must be said, he's a person of some name). The history shows it's been built up by only very few editors, and especially User:Elaine bull solely focus on this article. It's a [self-]promotional article in essence and as I cant find the correct template [which I'm always having troubles with], I'd like to know whether insertion of the following one; {{vfd-sp}} would be correct, or whether you'd suggest another template. [And does one stuff that on the page or on the talk page?] Qwrk ( talk) 21:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Mr. G. Appasami was born in Pondicherry, India in 1980. He received his Master of Science degree in Mathematics, Master of Computer Applications degree and Master of Technology degree in Computer Science and Engineering from Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. He received his Master of Philosophy in Computer Science from Alagappa University, Karaikudi, India.Currently he is faculty in Dr. Pauls Engineering College, Villupuram and affiliated to Anna University of Technology Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. He is a life member of Indian Society for Technical Education, Computer Society of India, International Association of Computer Science and Information Technology (Singapore) and International Association of Engineers. He has published more papers in national/international journals and conference proceedings. His Area of interests includes Network Security, image processing and web technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.102.195.186 ( talk) 08:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Pasquale Conte ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
much of the information in your article with regard to pasquale conte are unsubstantiated allegations and defamatory. I believe most of the information that is incorrect has been placed by his younger brother who his is bitter towards. pasquale conte jr. you may contact me to clarify anything you wish at [removed email] Other websites with erroneous information are not considered to be valid sources. passing along information you know to be untrue does not validate it in any way . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.75.11.61 ( talk) 20:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I was hoping some other editors could look at the last paragraph of this article regarding recent events. Three sources are cited but when you follow the sources, they use very vague language like "suspected" or it was the opinion of those present.... Plus the sources are not very high quality to begin with. It seems like the report of a rumor. Is it sufficient for BLP? Bluebonnet460 ( talk) 00:31, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Florian Witulski has made no significant or original contribution to his field. He is purely an inexperienced citizen journalist desperate for attention. His biography should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.33.129 ( talk) 20:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a minor dispute at the above article. The article at present gives the hometown of the band, a very small town in Australia. This is independently and reliably sourced and has been publically released on several occasions (see [22] and [23]). In my opinion, the information is reliably sourced, encyclopedic in nature and non-controversial. Rowie235 ( talk · contribs) has removed the name of the town on several occasions, citing his/her (good faith) concern that it is an invasion of privacy and may put members of the band at risk, considering their age (the youngest is 12) and the size of the town. See here for more detail on his/her concerns. The advice/mediation of a third party would be useful. Cheers, Mattinbgn ( talk) 03:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate the time taken to discuss this matter. I will contact the band and ask them to resolve it either through their own means or through my account (they don't have a wiki account).-- Rowie235 ( talk) 05:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
The Joe Banzhaf III article, absurdly, ends in 1981. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.196.202.95 ( talk) 00:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Very poorly written and no citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.249.31 ( talk) 02:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. The above article, while reasonably well referenced, appears to have a less-than-neutral tone to it. The general theme is negative and as such I think it could use some other eyes on it to ensure neutrality. All help appreciated. Thanks. The Rambling Man ( talk) 08:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Chris Gregg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Firstly would question his notability for Wikipedia inclusion. Secondly article seems to be self-promotional, particularly regarding his current company. Suggest deletion. regards, jwdd27
In his Bio, Steve Forrest was killed by Matt Dillon twice....once as "Mannon" and once again n the Gunsmoke movie, again as Mannon.
But, he was also killed one other time, 3 times in total, in "The Brothers". He Played the part of Cord Wrecken, shot by Matt Dillin in the Long Branch as he threatened Miss Kitty.
Bud Weisbrod — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.156.232.166 ( talk) 20:19, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Michael Cherney ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Another editor wants the following information in this (already controversial) article:
Several leaked US diplomatic cables from the US Embassy in Sofia, Bulgaria, mention Cherney. One describes him as a "notorious Russian crime figure" as well as a "Russian mobster". Continuing, it suggests that Cherney has "maintained influence over a number of companies by transferring ownership to Batkov" including PFC Levski Sofia and the Standardt newspaper. A second cable on the influence of Bulgarian organised crime in the cournty's football teams claims that Todor Batkov,the President of PFC Levski Sofia is "the proxy and front-man for the infamous Russian-Israeli businessman Michael Cherney". A third cable reports that Cherney "was expelled from Bulgaria in 2000 on the grounds of threatening national security".
In my view, the cables are either primary or secondary sources (depending on your point of view) and they lack context, including who exactly is making the accusations and why. I tried to keep the information out of the article, but the editor claims that other articles use these cables. See our Talk discussion here.
If these sources are not reliable for this purpose (my view), then we have clear BLP violations. I'd like other editors to take a look at this.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 20:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
An IP posted an RfC at Talk:Gregor_Robertson_(politician)#RFC:_negative_slant.3F regarding possible BLP issues in article Gregor_Robertson_(politician). (I'm not the RfC creator: I'm just cross-posting here to get more publicity). -- Noleander ( talk) 01:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
The article on Rajiva Wijesinha has been maliciously edited on 6/24/2011. In the second paragraph first line the word president has been replaced with "dictator". In para 5 line 1 the word "transvestite" has been inserted to describe Rajiva. These are obviously libelous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.152.248 ( talk) 03:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
A second opinion is needed of the article, following my copy-editing. (I have asked also for help at WikiProject Law.) Kiefer. Wolfowitz 20:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Martin Halstead ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Can someone have a look over this article and give it some TLC (it may even need deleting). I don't have time but a cursory glance shouts "help". Varsity Express is part of the related issues. Cheers all. -- Errant ( chat!) 21:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Bill Casselman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am William Gordon Casselman. details removed
Upon discovering a biographical Wiki item about myself and my works,that contained faulty entries, incomplete publication lists, various mistakes, I corrected them, only to have all the errors re-inserted.
The first report suggested strongly that I was either dead or no longer writing. That is deleterious to my career. That is one of the three requiasites to launch libel.
As the Wiki entry was called a biography of Bill Casselman, I added a publicly attested short biography from my website and from the author copy of all my third-party published books. But some arrogant editor, without so much as emailing me, has removed all the information I added, plus RE-INSERTED his or her mistakes. One of the things I did was merely put in the date of publication of all my books. Those dates were removed.
The utter snotty no-knowingness of the editor who first wrote and then removed all my corrections simply takes my breath away. I would ask you to insert all the edits I painstakingly inserted into a faulty biographical sketch that strongly hinted I was sitting somewhere drooling in a padded Alzheimer's chair, when in fact I am busy correcting my 15th book for American publication.
Therefore what your bizarre Wiki rules suggest is that some editor who has never contacted me knows more about my life than I do!!!
Out-fucking-rageous.
Please put my corrections back into the Wiki piece.
Bill Casselman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.12.163.48 ( talk • contribs)
Freedom Flotilla II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A little while ago I scanned through our Freedom Flotilla II article, where I chanced upon the follow -
The following two articles were given as references.
The issue is, the JPost cites the Telegraaf as the source of its information, while the Telegraaf cites an unnamed "intelligence source". So basically the information is coming from some nameless, faceless spokesperson for the Israeli government.
Thinking this was clearly inappropriate, I deleted it, only to have my revision undone by User:Epeefleche, who insists that since Telegraaf and JPost are WP:RS, the material is actually "well sourced".
I think it should be relatively obvious to anyone who examines the sources that keeping the material as is makes WP a mouthpiece for some unknown "intelligence source", which is pretty clearly not good practice.
On another note, following my edit and Epee's undo, Epeefleche actually started a Amin Abu Rashid page. Epee has a rather long history of tendentious editing on Israel-Palestine articles. Anyone feel that Epee's creative manipulation of sources might rise to the level of arbitration? NickCT ( talk) 14:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Sword of St. Michael ( talk · contribs) has added a number of catholic priests and others who committed child abuse to categories such as Category:LGBT people from Australia and Category:LGBT people from Ireland. While these individuals abused boys, I don't see anything in the articles to indicate that they identified as homosexual. This seems like an attempt to use wikipedia to make a point. The user has been doing something similar by labeling certain sources he doesn't like as Jewish [24]. GabrielF ( talk) 14:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
As regards the adding of sexual criminals to a cat, that is also not something we do here as I have seen. A person committing a rape can go into the rapist cat but a person committing a gay rape doesn't belong in the LGBT cats as they would require self identification with that group as per WP:BLPCAT - or whichever that guideline is. Off2riorob ( talk) 15:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
( edit conflict) Not only do they have to self-identify as being gay, but their sexual orientation has to be related to their notability. Otherwise, it violates WP:BLPCAT. I think it's virtually impossible to argue that the sexual orientation of an abuser of same-sex children is related to his notability. If that were so, then the sexual orientation of heterosexual child molesters would be related to their notability. The categories should be removed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Recently, the subject Bernard-Henri Lévy has been under attack in the MSM and on blogs because he has stood by his friend, Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Somebody in a major blog is citing this article and suggesting BHL is a fraud.
Since I am a newcomer to WIKI editing and not an expert in this field, can an experienced editor review this article? I have neither the chops nor the facility to do this on my own.
I do not know the subject and have no financial or personal interest thereon. PietrH ( talk) 20:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Ismail Darbar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Person is posting material based on articles that cite rumors and anonymous sources. I removed once and has been re-added. I do not want to start an edit war. [26]] also on [27] ‡ MAHEWA ‡ • talk 03:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Lewinsky (neologism) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I deleted an article that appears to violate WP:BLP and blocked the editor who created it, an account created today with only this one article as edits. Please weigh in here. Dreadstar ☥ 23:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Now at AFD - Off2riorob ( talk) 03:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewinsky (neologism) ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Ferial Haffajee ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello I am trying to make a change to the biography of Ferial Haffajee. I have already amended her wikipedia profile but can't seem to edit her facebook wiki profile. It describes her as 'non-white' which she objects to. I need to change the 'non-white' to Black. How do I do this so that it changes all wiki linked profiles of her, not just the wikipedia one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saritaranchod ( talk • contribs) 06:47, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Shahid Malik ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch is suffering from a long standing dispute by multiple parties and really needs a look though from neutral parties. Brandon ( talk) 09:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Larry Graham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Larry Graham article states that Graham converting Prince to Jehova's Witness narrowed his world view and ruined his career... the following sentence: "Larry Graham introduced Prince to his brand of religion and Prince has never been the same since. In fact, the music he has released signals the end of a career that had had so much potential. Larry Graham should no longer be a member of the New Power Generation," is clearly opinion and is not backed up by references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.74.26.3 ( talk) 11:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
John Varty ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Certain editors purge my contributions to John Varty. Their contributions are defamatory Tigeralert ( talk) 13:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Andy Gallinagh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I find the opening paragraph disgusting. Andy Gallinagh has never been referred to as 'the spastic one' nor shows qualities of being down syndrome.
I find it appalling that down syndromes have now been referred to as 'spastics'- in this article. This statement is dishonest and is a complete violation of Andy Gallinaghs' profile.
It is a disgrace that this has been given such easy access to world wide viewing.
Andy Gallinagh is in the light of fame and I appreciate that all press/opinions/statements, will differ in style and positivity. However, this prejudice statement not only affects peoples feelings but is invasion of Andy Gallinaghs' rights to honest press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.204.143 ( talk) 21:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
United States and state terrorism ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Chomsky himself has been criticized for supporting Hezbollah, an organization designated by the United States as a terrorist group. "Citing with approval a journalist's observation that Hezbollah 'is not a terror organization,' Chomsky explained that the terrorist who blew up 243 U.S. Marines in Lebanon and murdered untold citizens of Israel was only engaging in 'legitimate resistance' against an oppressor and 'avoids striking civilians except in retaliation for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilians.'" [28]
Does this quote violate BLP? It is sourced to an editorial by David Horowitz in FrontPage Magazine ("Noam Chomsky's love affair with Nazis"). [29] Horowitz is the one providing the criticism. Is the source reliable, are the opinions expressed notable, is the wording neutral and is it relevant to the article? TFD ( talk) 01:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
After reviewing BLP, I realize that the reference may have been unduly inflammatory. Please note I toned it down to better comply with policy. I'd appreciate your feedback. Scaleshombre ( talk) 02:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
What about this?
During a televised discussion about terrorism, former U.S. Secretary of Education William Bennett noted that Chomsky is "the man ... who said that the reports of atrocities by the Khmer Rouge were grossly exaggerated. ... Go through the Chomsky work, line by line, argument by argument, and you will see this is a man who has made a career out of hating America and out of trashing the record of this country." [30] (Source: CNN transcript [31])
TFD ( talk) 02:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Gabriel, it's a good cite. Kudos. Scaleshombre ( talk) 05:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I think the key point is to explicitly address Chomsky's ideas about the US and state terrorism. What's missing in the Horowitz quote is a sentence from the source that explicitly makes that link. Something on the order of: "Horowitz argues that Chomsky's definition of terrorism is biased [or incorrect, or whatever he says], because he sees Hezbollah as a legitimate resistance group rather than a terrorist organization." (I don't know if Horowitz says this exactly, but my point is that this is how it should be framed.) If its framed as a discussion of Chomsky's ideas on the US and state terrorism than BLP is much less of an issue. Horowitz is not the most sober source but I think he's fine if he's used as a way to explain why people might disagree with Chomsky. A more mainstream counterpoint would be preferable but there's nothing wrong with using an op-ed to establish that the writer disagrees with Chomsky. GabrielF ( talk) 04:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Amy Locane ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'd be grateful if someone could have a look at Amy Locane and give some clarity on whether the level of detail that an editor is putting in is appropriate within the terms of BLP. I've warned a user for 3RR, and I'll watch the page and protect if necessary. Thanks. Ged UK 13:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Luciana Berger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Some third party views on the recent edit war at the article would be welcomed at the article talk page, to establish consensus. Thanks. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Josh Groban ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
24.12.127.43 ( talk · contribs) has been persistently adding the unsourced (and as far as I can see unsourceable) name of his alleged girl friend to this article, and alleged past girlfriends to other articles. They have continued this despite multiple reverts by other editors (four times today alone) [32] and multiple warnings on their talk page, including a final warning. Perhaps a short block might concentrate the mind? Voceditenore ( talk) 15:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Matt Damon ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
someone wrote some really bad stupid stuff about Matt and it should be removed a.s.a.p., I am not a member so I am just informing Wikipedia about this bad information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.69.133.221 ( talk) 02:28, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Antonio Arnaiz-Villena ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Akerbeltz,Dumu Eduba,Kwamikagami and Trigaranus are spoiling Antonio Arnaiz-Villena biography with their opinions as pointed out bu User:Zero .They were apparent linguists that later become interested only just on the false legal accusations that rised against Arnaiz-Villena after publishing a forbidden(!) genetics paper on Palestinians.This is now in the page.They do not let clarify what WP asks for update or references. Symbio04 ( talk) 17:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I've bowed out from editing the article for the moment (although not because of Iberomesornix's absurd comments). I'm awaiting the outcome of the SPI investigation before doing anything else. It would still help, though, if other editors would take an interest in the article.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 02:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Tzvi Erez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Additional review of this new article, with a keen eye towards BLP issues, would be appreciated. The subject was charged with various fraud crimes, but the charges were dropped due to a shortage of court time and judges, so he was never actually convicted of anything. At this time it appears to be a case of WP:UNDUE, with a couple sentences related to his work as a pianist, and the remainder focusing on the ponzi scheme and its fall-out. If the crime is really the notable nugget in all of this, then perhaps the article should be moved to reflect that? Other opinions would be appreciated. Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 15:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Jay Severin ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having problems at the Jay Severin article with neutrality/undue weight issues and a nascent edit war. The original article didn't follow any wikipedia format and seemed (to me) to consist of a bloated lede followed by a list of the subject's misdeeds (he's a recently-fired talk radio "shock jock" from the Boston area). I posted a comment in the talk section of the article indicating an intent to correct the perceived deficiencies, then re-formatted the article in my sandbox to conform to the biography template, pared back the criticisms section, and created the missing sections. In the absence of comments rejecting my assessment, I made the changes about six days later. A possible (likely) edit war is brewing between myself and Xerxesnine over the changes. My opinion is that the original article was well-referenced but placed undue weight on the Severin's tenure in Boston and specifically on the controversies he generated as a radio talk show host. If someone neutral could drop by and evaluate the situation, it could help Xerxesnine and I to reach an amicable consensus. TreacherousWays ( talk) 10:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with the undue weight tag, which has been restored. My problem has always been with the absurd amount of brand new unsourced material in the rewrite. Xerxesnine ( talk) 19:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Aaadietya Pandey ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have been trying to improve this BLP, lots of dead links and promotional stuff. Other than a few brief mentions in Times of India articles I cannot find any good sources for this person. There also doesn't seem to be an article in Hindi for him, which is strange for an Indian person. How to go forward with this one? MakeSense64 ( talk) 16:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Adrian Lewis Morgan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am Adrian's Agent and have removed the details about his Personal Life as these were not added by Adrian and he prefers that this information be kept private. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinorhilton ( talk • contribs) 16:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Rybka ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Vasik Rajlich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
In light of plagiarism accusations, do we have a clear BLP policy of assuming innocence until proven otherwise by a court of law (not championship)? Artem Karimov ( talk) 19:45, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Article about an awared (which may or may not be notable, but that's a separate issue) which lists a number of names of those awarded it but has no references at all. Santosham Film Awards is similar except it is mainly a list of daughter articles which are the articles including names, not all unsourced. Dougweller ( talk) 08:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Raymond Hoser ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has had original research added to the effect that he is the sole author of a journal - for which the editor simply examined the onlne journal. I suggest that this is the essence of OR, that any contentious claims in a BLP must be sourced, but I am met with
Is WP:BLP now irrelevant when an editor wishes to state that a journal is a "vanity jurnal" but can not find an actual RS making that claim? Cheers. Collect ( talk) 11:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
QED: Claims based on such OR and not based on a reliable secondary source must be removed from BLPs. That is "da rules" SBHB. Sorry if you dislike them <g>. Cheers Collect ( talk) 11:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Kristin Bauer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I hope an admin can look into this, I wasn't sure whether to post this here or at the COI noticeboard or inappropriate username. But there has been an ongoing dispute about the subjects date of birth - year. Now it has been changed by user:fifteenminutespr and a message left on the talk page. There is a Fifteen Minutes PR firm: http://www.fifteenminutes.com/ I have changed the date back a few times, from an IP's edit, but I"m ready to let someone else take a look. Bluebonnet460 ( talk) 19:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
The cited source does not mention her year or date of birth. I've looked her up in the biographical reference work Contemporary Theatre, Film and Television, and that cites November 26, 1973 as her date of birth. Even if this RS is incorrect, we can't declare it wrong and another date correct based on conjecture. I'll refrain from inserting the 1973 date into the article for now, but I've removed the 1966 date as unsourced. Gamaliel ( talk) 22:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Gene Melchiorre ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The statement in Melchiorre's article contains an erroneous statement, namely that he scored 71 points in an NIT Tournament game. According to the Bradley University Sports Information Office, Melchiorre never scored as many as 30 points while playing for Bradley. Also, according to the NIT, the record for most points scored in one game is held by George Mikan. His record is in the low 40's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BradleyProf ( talk • contribs) 20:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Glenn Mulcaire ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This seems like a textbook case of BLP1E, so I redirected it to News of the World phone hacking affair, but I was reverted by none other than Jimbo Wales. I'm a bit surprised by this so I thought I'd ask BLP regulars for their thoughts. Gamaliel ( talk) 15:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Ridiculous comment posted by someone... In CAPITAL LETTERS under 'Career as Prosecutor' Please Remove! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shalimar777 ( talk • contribs) 21:08, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Described in first line as "an Ass Activist", with the word "Ass" hyperlinked to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spamhole ( talk • contribs) 22:06, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
The article cites no outside sources whatsoever. It needs to be cleaned up. It has a random quotation section citing "he has been heard to say" and the only thing that actually is a citation directs to the pages, where Yoshimitsu Yamada either is a boss, owner, or board member. I suspect it was written by someone very close to him in the organization that this man owns if not by Yoshimitsu himself.
None of the claims in this article are verified and frankly the article also lacks in notability. It should be either cleaned up or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.91.184.39 ( talk) 04:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Aelita Andre ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, I'm writing here because I want to clarify a few things regarding a recent series of edits made on an article that I wrote and am maintaining, Aelita Andre. Earlier today, User:Cramyourspam made four successive edits to the article, the end result of which was:
(1) The addition of critical information about the article's subject sourced only by a private blog.
(2) The addition of an autobiography tag justified with a statement that I, the article's author, "seem" close to the subject because there isn't really anything negative about her in the article. I contested this on the article's talk page, because it isn't true and because nearly every sentence of the article is followed by 1 to 3 inline citations from reliable sources, so the accusation was sort of ridiculous.
Because this user made four uninterrupted edits in a row, I undid them with four uninterrupted edits in a row. I'm afraid now that someone might see this as more than 3 edits in a 24-hour period, but this was actually a single edit in 4 parts (since the other user did not edit between my 4 edits). Additionally, these edits were done in order to remove contentious material in a BLP. Curiously, this user's page explicitly states that edits to the user's personal talk page are not welcome. Because I wanted to draw the user's attention to the article's talk page so we could have a discussion, I simply reverted the next edit that he (or she) made with an edit summary stating "Cramyourspam, I undid this only to let you know I want to talk about this on the Talk Page since you don't want messages on your page." If anyone here is interested in the full chronology of events and in everything that was said on the article's talk page, please take a look. I hope for two things from you:
(1) I'd like some form of confirmation that the situation is understood in case anyone sees, at a quick glance, that I made the three uninterrupted reverts in a row, and in case that person doesn't notice that these are all really a single change undone in the same consecutive steps in which they were created in the first place. Moreover, I want to point out immediately that the motivation behind the edits was to remove contentious, poorly sourced information in a BLP. I strongly encourage anyone interested to view this page in detail.
(2) Although an uninvolved rollbacker chanced upon the page, reverted it to its original state (what it was before Cramyourspam's first edit), and helped to resolve the issue by now, I would like some feedback on how I handled the situation so I can improve my response in similar situations in the future. Of course, if you don't have time to do that, I understand.
Thank you for your time, Armadillopteryx talk 02:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Mark Hackel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Mark Hackel is an elected official whose father was convicted of a serious felony. I've been having a disagreement with another user about the issue; he wishes to include this information in Mark's article while I think it should not be. The talk page and article history should tell the tale more fully, but in short I believe the conviction is not sufficiently relevant to Mark's notability to be included and is merely inflammatory, which as I understand the policy would make it a BLP issue. Could we get some eyes more familiar with the nuances of BLP than I to see if it actually is or not? Imyourfoot ( talk) 20:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)