![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Zhang Ziyi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There has been a frequent libelous and defamatory reporting noted as a 'Controversy' under the Zhang Ziyi biographical page. The actress has denied the unfounded claims made by Apple Daily and is taking legal action against the tabloid. By posting the false report on Wikipedia, the authors are only further slandering the actress. A libelous tabloid making a false claim (with no quoted sources) against a well respected professional cannot be considered a 'controversy.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.6.31.226 ( talk) 03:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Rajesh Hamal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I've got to head to bed, but I just pulled "rumors" of affairs and mental illness out fo this article, it's large, essentially unsourced, and could easily have other issues going on in it. Additional eyes appreciated. -- joe decker talk to me 06:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Tommy Morrison ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I was reviewing this article on an unrelated OTRS matter and can see there is some edit-warring going on between an IP (who claims to be the subject) and another editor as to whether to include specific details regarding the subject's medical history. Perhaps someone here could eyeball it to make sure all is BLP-compliant with regard to the disputed material? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 20:38, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Paul Bettany ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The following appears in the Personal Life section:
The quintuplets, Abigail, Mary, Kristina and Benjamin, born on September 21, 2007 and the twins, Anastacia and Cecillia, born on November 24, 2008, are fruits of their relationship with the Brazilian, Lidiane.
I believe this may be an error because I cannot find evidence of these children in any other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LASwartz ( talk • contribs) 01:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Okay, while I'm not sure this is the right forum for this, I think it will work. I recently marked Yvonne Wartiainen, Shani Haider, and Arash Howaida for BLP PROD. Yvonne Wartiainen and Shani Haider had their PROD templates removed, but I'm not sure if the references provided are reliable sources, and I would like a second opinion. As for Arash Howaida: it was speedily deleted under G11 and A7, then recreated. Again, I'm not sure if the sources are reliable, and would like an outside look at it. David 1217 02:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Has attracted several "new editors" each of who proposes the exact same edits founded in blogs and "court records" etc. which are on their face contentious (that he was associated with illegal offshore gambling operations and criminals) relying heavily on the blog "Atlanta Unfiltered". I am a teensy bit suspicious that such new editors make exactly the same edits - might someone opine on the remote possibility that they are acting in a less than proper manner? Cheers. Collect ( talk) 02:49, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
No -- but I consider such edits as [5] to be UNDUE and violative of WP:BLP, and quite improper. And people who reinsert the edits of socks are quite likely to be viewed enablers of their behaviour. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 14:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
John Messuri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article contains the following libelous sentence:
"He took over for Richard Dicaprio, after continuous struggling seasons."
The above is not true and is defamatory to the reputation of Hall of Fame coach Richard DeCaprio. When googling "Richard DeCaprio Arlington" this is the first story that comes up. Messuri did not take over for DeCaprio after "continuous struggling seasons". That is a subjective statement about the quality of Arlington's Hockey seasons and paints Coach DeCaprio in a bad light. Remove this language immediately.
John Messuri — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.68.168 ( talk) 11:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Political Scrapbook ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Edits made to insert unsourced claims defamatory to living person (editor of a political news site). [8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.194.133.187 ( talk) 14:29, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Someone keeps changing the information on Edgar Mejia to say that he plays for Real Madrid on loan from Barcelona. Attempts have been made to correct the errors, but eventually someone logs back on to edit the page with false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.8.39.93 ( talk) 21:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Kitty101423 ( talk · contribs) has repeatedly (over more than a year) added vast amounts of original reasearch information, much of which is obviously libellous ("The headmaster also showed poor judgement in running the school, particularly in...", "Some parents are now asking why the headmaster is still employed by the school"). Latest edits here [9]. She has ignored repeated requests to discuss on the talk page. -- Lo2u ( T • C) 11:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Denis Mitchison ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The reference to "Graeme Mitchison", a living mathematician, as a "dilettante", could be offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.169.9.14 ( talk) 12:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Anthony Hanemaayer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can other editors weigh in on what should be done with this article? This man was wrongly convicted of a serious crime and was ultimately acquitted and released. The WP article, until I removed most of it, consisted mostly unsourced material about the case, including negative material about the man. I am thinking that this is a classic example of WP:BLP1E and should be sent to AFD. What do others think? -- Slp1 ( talk) 17:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Sent to AfD. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 13:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Andy Hamilton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
it has been edited to say that andy died on 4 june 2012. he did not it was the saxophonist andy hamilton who died
Adonis Stevenson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Potentially Libelous Third paragraph of "Professional Career" section, final sentence. Alleges, as factual, illegal bias on part of specific referee. Alleges corruption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.82.146.3 ( talk) 18:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Matthew Grow ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I just placed a Prod on him as "not notable" - as I can not find anywhere that a publications director of a church meets general notability guidelines .. but would more than welcome people proving me wrong. Thanks. Collect ( talk) 20:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Come on, folks, it's really not all that complicated. The subject's notability is not related to his status in the Mormon church; rather, his notability is due to his being a preeminent historian in his field, published by academic presses and reviewed in innumerable journals, etc. End of story.These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons.--- wp:N
As a side issue (which should be disregarded, as far as mere wp:N is concerned), Dr. Grow's ecclesiastical functionary title is, um, "notable"...as a detail--a mere detail--within any complete biography of him.
Sure, issues such as bias/conflict of interest/etc. come into play when evaluating the contributions of people of a particular subgroup. Such issues must be taken into account when using such scholars' works. --By way of example, absolutely, historians among the descendants of the Fancher-Baker party give short shrift to historians working for the Mormon church and vice versa. (Note that References/MASSACRE PERPETRATORS.pdf this F-B party descendents site's pdf lists novelist and historian Sally Denton as an authority but neglects to mention Ronald W. Walker and Glen M. Leonard, whose tome on the ill-fated emigrant wagon train following the Old Spanish Trail westward was published by Oxford Univ.: both of whom work for the LDS. Yet, the Mormon studies fanboys/girls that edit the WP article on the event tend to give short shrift to popularizer Denton (or even Jon Krakauer), showing comparatively more favor to Walker or Leonard (while also taking into account their ostensibly pro-LDS frame of reference).)
Yet do such considerations mean we must reflexively ghettoize scholars whose expertise is especially regional or else within a field of study pertaining to a particular religion or ethnic subgroup? No.
Relatedly, how must we take into account what a person's day job is, when determining notability of his or her academic or creative output? The answer: we pay it mind to the degree it is relevant. Eg: a hobo whose poetry, copied at library Xerox machines, is all the rage...but only among other hobos...has no encyclopedic notability, per wp:N ( wp:RS, etc.). Yet, if this same hobo becomes renown as "the hobo poet" and becomes published by a prestige publisher and his or her work reviewed in reliable sources, then he or she is notable, despite the very common day um "job"/status within society.
Looking up the "innumerable" journals: Googlescholar finds only two of his articles cited by anyone at all (one article is cited by 4, another by 2). Far from "innumerable" this is a minor author at best. He appears in absolutely zero instances in the NYT. No academic notability, as he appears to be an "Assistant Professor at the University of Southern Indiana " only ( [11]). Wikipedia does not accept that title as conferring notability. And yes, WP:IAR exists, but I doubt you will find backing for eliding notability standards here. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Charles Lane (journalist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article falsely claims that I was fired from my job at The New Republic and otherwise distorts the details of my career. It is clearly not intended as an objective presentation but the opposite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.49.173 ( talk) 00:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
It is false -- and unsourced here -- that Marty Peretz privately blamed Charles Lane for Steve Glass's fabrications. It is also false that Lane wrote disparagingly about obese people, or that he faced criticism for doing so, other than a single erroneous column in the City Paper of Washington DC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.49.173 ( talk) 00:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The BLP grossly abused the sources which made clear that Lane was the "cleaner-upper" who got rid of Glass -- and in no way the one who was involved otherwise. The other bits also editorialised contrary to what the actual sources said - and should be chastised therefor. I did leave in the blogger saying Lane should "chuck off" as it indicated the level of source used. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 13:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
This article is being repeatedly vandalised by having verifiable factual content deleted and links to blog opinion inserted. Maherus ( talk) 06:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Can other editors look at the refs in this diff and indicate whether they think they meet WP:RS for purposes of this BLP? thanks. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 12:14, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Alive (1993 film) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Several months ago I tried to correctly edit the cast sub-section of this film, but was informed that my edits were unsubstantiated, despite the fact that on a Wikipedia page of the actor in dispute (Miguel Ferrer) confirms my original edit. Under the page for this film, Alive, you have John Malchovich listed as the Narrator (Uncredited) On the wiki page for Miguel Ferrer, he is listed as the uncredited narrator of this film (See filmography" Both articles cannot be true; one has to be wrong. According to the DVD that I just watched, it is in fact, Miguel Ferrer who was the uncredited narrator--NOT John Malchovich. The fact that the IMDB also lists John Malchovich as the narrator, just shows that their source is not an accurate one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mytimeistoday ( talk • contribs) 19:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Howard Fineman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, there are two minor errors that warrant correction in the Howard Fineman biographical article. I spotted these errors because I work with Howard Fineman. Because my employment relationship presents a WP:COI, I was wondering if someone here on the BLP/N would be able to review and make these two corrections:
Thanks for your help. If any further sources are needed to justify the changes suggested above, please let me know and I'd be happy to provide those. Cheers, Jeff Bedford ( talk) 16:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to look into this so thoroughly. I submit that we take a closer look at the phrase "who is Jewish."
While WP:BLP does not cover this type of content directly, WP:BLPCAT states that "Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources." Put more briefly, religious inclusion requires both (a) self-identification, and (b) relevance (with RS) to notability.
The spirit of WP:BLP would also suggest that a living person ought to have a right to self-identify as part of a religious group. While the subject of this article attended a predominantly Jewish high school and was bar mitzvahed several decades ago, the subject has not self-identified as being Jewish, and his religion is not related to his notability.
Based on these factors, it does not seem to be fitting to speculate that the subject of this article "is Jewish." Bus stop, what are your thoughts on this? Could a few others could weigh in as well, in order to help establish consensus? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 19:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, it is helpful that several are weighing in, as this will help in establishing consensus on what is, naturally, a complex topic. "Raised in a Jewish family" seems accurate. The only question that remains is, doesn't this sentence sound a bit odd with the religious background inserted into it? It now reads:
His first journalism work involved writing for this regional newspaper about state politics and the environment, but neither these subjects, nor the paper itself or his journalism career are tied to the religion of his parents.
For instance, the article about Mel Gibson mentions his religious upbringing because it is directly related to his notability (he directed a prominent film on a religious subject, Passion of the Christ). However, the article about Josh Weinstein does not mention his religious upbringing because that is not directly tied to his notability (he was a writer for The Simpsons). It would be odd to read a sentence such as 'Weinstein, who was raised in a _______ family, began writing for The Simpsons in...'
Since Howard Fineman is notable as a political journalist and this notability is not tied to his religious beliefs, what are your thoughts on revising this content to a state where it does not include the religious qualifiers? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 14:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Settled, I trust. Collect ( talk) 15:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
off topic, please rethink this |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Wikidemon, the way you put this makes a lot of sense. I just spoke with Howard Fineman about this and he indicated that he'd prefer the Wikipedia article about him refrain from discussing his religion or religious upbringing. He feels that since his reason for notability (as a journalist) is not related to his religious upbringing. I've informed him of WP:OWN and WP:COI, so he understands that this is a Wikipedia article about him, and not his Wikipedia article. He trusts the community of editors here to ultimately make the right decisions. Does that context help in establishing consensus on this? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 19:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible for a few other BLP/N experts to weigh in on this thread and come to a conclusion? As noted above, I have a COI, so I would prefer to limit myself to presenting information, leaving it up to you all to make the editorial decision. Cheers, Jeff Bedford ( talk) 13:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Jeremy Wade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Jeremy Wade was born March 23, 1956...not May 5th. This was confirmed on Icon Films, Bristol website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.103.182 ( talk) 17:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Armstrong & Getty ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article is about an AM radio morning show that covers most of Northern CA. The hosts continually invite listeners to "spice up" or "vandalize" the article, leading to outrageous edits such as this most recent diff and this diff chosen at random. I don't know how to address this. Maybe semi protection to discourage anonymous IPs?-- William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 18:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Daniel Mattes ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article is written like beeing a PR for Daniel Mattes. Several sources are not reliable. Comments like "Bill Gates of the Alps" are not objective. Instead of linking an original source of a newspaper there are links to Daniel Mattes own flickr account.
Salzburger Fenster is a very local magazine. Beeing there on the list of 100 most important people is not worth mentioning in an international encyclopedia. Also this cite was written that it reads like he was 54th most important citicen of Austria, which is wrong, as he was just on the list for Salzburg.
The whole article lacks objectivity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.26.99.61 ( talk) 13:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Bernhard Goetz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Overview: It looks like there is a concerted effort to insert unsourced accusations of animal abuse at Bernhard Goetz. One of the editors fighting against this claims to be Bernhard Goetz.
Examples:
User:RRassendyll says things on Talk:Bernhard Goetz that clearly violate our BLP policy [14]
User:RRassendyll inserts the same BLP-violating material at Bernhard Goetz [15]
172.129.57.123 reverts [16]
172.129.57.123 posts to Bernhard Goetz, claims to be "Bernie Goetz" [17]
162.83.220.208 inserts the same BLP-violating material at Bernhard Goetz [18]
User:Djenner files a case at WP:DRN naming User:R. Rassendyll and User:Bernhard Goetz [19] I close it because neither user exists. (Note: "Rudolf Rassendyll" is a fictional character from The Prisoner of Zenda)
User:Djenner argues for inclusion of material despite failing WP:V [20]
There is a lot more going on, but it's hard to follow because of shifting IPs and users editing while not logged on. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 01:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
We could use some input on this article. We have an IP who is insisting because one person referred to this actor as Clive Warren that "He is sometimes called Clive Warren" and that fact should be included in the lede. If in you examination of this you feel that the info is notable just leave a note here and I will accept your judgement(s) on the matter. Thanks in advance for your time in looking at this. MarnetteD | Talk 19:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Stan Jolley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am Stan Jolley's son-in-law. I have tried twice to correct and add information to the Wikipedia profile on Stan Jolley. This includes information about his death on 6/4/12 and additions to his credits in the film industry. User "Lugnuts" has twice reverted my work. I believe he is calling for citations. I and my wife, Stan's heir, are the source regarding his death. We have not published his obituary yet. As for his film credits, he supplied them to me on paper - the same credits he supplied IMDB and are published there. I noted that on my revision, but Lugnuts chose to ignore and change the bio back. Since Stan Jolley is the source on himself, and I am the source for info on his passing, how is this a violation of the terms regarding biographys? How can I get my work put back permanently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaisen ( talk • contribs) 00:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Vint Cerf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
He is now listed as British computer scientist not American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.33.59 ( talk) 16:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Just changed, all reliable references show that he was born in New Haven Conneticut. NO sources were shown or added in to say otherwise. I've also left a note on the page of the individual that made the change. User:KoshVorlon Talk 17:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Jean Morton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Jean Morton returned to the UK a few years ago. She died on May 26th, 2012, aged 91, in Beechfield Nursing Home, Lichfield. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.107.214 ( talk) 19:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Seán Sherlock ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has IPs adding a table of expenses [22] for the person - relying entirely on a primary source, and without trying for discussion thereon. Collect ( talk) 20:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Patrick Greene (activist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
My name is Patrick Greene. I am the "activist" that the article is all about. First of all I am not a Christian anymore. Second, I was never an officer in the Air Force. I was an enlisted man for 8 1/2 years. From 1968-77. Third, I never filed any lawsuit against Henderson County. Forth, the rally had nothing to do with me. I didn't even know about the Nativity scene issue until after the rally. You spelled Jessica Crye's name wrong. Lastly I would like to know who put in all the information about me, considering a lot of it is wrong. Please forward my email address to that person, so I can set them straight about me.
thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.11.150.125 ( talk) 00:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Ruthanna Hopper ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
It has been brought to my attention that my biography (Ruthanna Hopper) on Wikipedia is not accurate. If there is an editor who can help me, I would greatly appreciate it. The edit is fairly simple. I co-wrote two novels, "Celebutantes" in 2008, a New York Times bestseller and "Beneath A Starlet Sky", published in 2011. http://us.macmillan.com/beneathastarletsky/AmandaGoldberg I've tried to make the changes myself but have been unsuccessful. The biography has my occupation listed as an actress and film producer, which is not accurate. I've made some appearances in movies but I am an author. I would greatly appreciate some assistance on this. Thank you!
Best, Ruthanna Hopper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Childofthe60s ( talk • contribs) 04:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Bob Hoskins ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PLEASE ADD THE FILM "THE HOUSE THAT MARY BUILT" TO HIS CREDIT. JUST WATCHED IT ON T.V. COULD NOT FIND THE FILM ANYWHERE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.137.4 ( talk) 23:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Catherine Bosley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Once again, someone's added a separate section with an apparently well known "wardrobe malfunction" type incident, without inline citations. See here for previous discussion of this on this noticeboard.
The IP concerned seems well intentioned, but I've reverted them here because I don't have time to sift through all the news reports and work out what exactly is due weight for this and exactly which facts can be sourced properly.
If anyone has time to add a brief, properly sourced, and appropriate weight mention of this to the article, that would be great. If not, it may need another year's semi-protection. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 04:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Owen Jones (writer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Someone re-adding childish vandalism after I reverted. Thanks. Itsmejudith ( talk) 14:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Coleen Nolan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article contains paragraph "In January 2007, Nolan courted further controversy when, during a debate on Loose Women about gay adoption, she stated her opinion that gay people should not be allowed to adopt children,[27] and said that "there's only so much I want to accept".[12]. There are NO sources for this. The sources cited are false pages, but I have been warned by Wikipedia for trying to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.179.73 ( talk) 14:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Gregory Stanton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A BLP issue has been raised re Gregory Stanton article in a DRN post. Libel has been asserted. Any help from BLP experts would be appreciated. Please post any comments at the DRN page, not here, to keep the discussion centralized. -- Noleander ( talk) 15:43, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Nazima ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Nazima is still alive and she lives in Mumbai with her family — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.125.204.19 ( talk) 17:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hi Everyone,
Sorry to have to stick this back on here seeing that it has been here just last week. It was generally agreed at the time that a number of SPA's had been involved in editing the page making it look more and more like an attack page.
The article was cleaned up with collective effort to an acceptable standard albeit short.
It now looks like another SPA has been created smearing negative remarks all over the page.
Sources are used in some places (Under the France) section, referring to court proceedings, the article referenced is from the 13th of April, the actual court hearing was not until the 17th and the outcome was indeed very different from the source quoted.
If you google the individual and his companies it becomes clear that they have restructured their business and that there has been a number of redundancies in the last year, to me it looks like disgruntled individuals are using wikipedia as a means of "getting even" in this individual and his companies.
It was suggested at one point that the page was to be semi-protected for a short while. Would it not be a good idea to clean it up again, and semi-protect it until SPA's loose interest in this article? I would be quite happy to chip in when it comes to this, but it feels a bit like we're swimming upstream as every time something is cleaned up it is undone. Sweboi ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mike James ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I do not think this article should be deleted, but it needs some major work. NPOV is definitely in question here, as well as some serious citation issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Js sherlock ( talk • contribs) 17:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
User:CarmeloLisciotto ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I deleted the above userpage and blocked the user for impersonation and creating an attack page. It has been pointed out to me that prior to vandalisms, this was a former copyright violation and self-advertisement, but definitely not an attack page and probably not an impersonation. I just want some folks' eyes besides my own on this account; and want to apologize for insufficient due diligence. -- Orange Mike | Talk 21:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
There has been a dispute at LaRouche movement over the application of WP:BLPCRIME. As you can see in this edit, one editor says that it is proper to include numerous accusations of criminal activity where no convictions were obtained, as long as the specific names of the accused are not included. I personally think that it would be more proper and less weaselly if there were names included, and that the best solution is to omit the accusations. But I wanted to bring it to this board for discussion. Waalkes ( talk) 21:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mushahid Ullah Khan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The information that is present in the article is not correct. The reference is not correct and information that is put in is not referenced. Please remove it ASAP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.19.41 ( talk) 00:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Malcolm Gladwell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A bit of an argument going on at Talk:Malcolm_Gladwell#.27Blatant_corruption.27 over a continuing edit war -- I think that the section title suggests what it's about. Rather to my surprise, there are now experienced editors on both sides of the argument. Oh well ... let's have a few more experienced editors, and then perhaps the matter will be settled, one way or another. -- Hoary ( talk) 10:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You're wrong, of course. The issue is being dealt with at "Blatant corruption". (Incidentally, we all already believe in peace and fucking; no need to harp on the matter.) -- Hoary ( talk) 06:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Ponnala Lakshmaiah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone take a look at this one, it needs editing with a chainsaw. Section headings like As Icon of Inspiration, Man OF Integrity & Passion, Life of the Sparkling Star show where the BLP issue lies. This is an article about a politician, so some COI editing seems to be going on. 109.77.113.165 ( talk) 10:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The article was previously bad, but not embarrassingly/hilariously so. I've reverted a lot of edits to restore it to its previously (bad) state. This is not satisfactory (and neither of course is it hilarious). Hoary ( talk) 12:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Craig Thomson affair ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have discovered that this borderline attack page on a Member of Parliament (under voluntary suspension from the Australian Labor Party) is being edited by at least one member of the Liberal Party of Australia. Thus there is a huge WP:COI. WP:BLP is being totally ignored; unreliable sources which border on the edge of defamation (under Australian law) are being cited and then added to the Wikipedia article in a libelous manner. Please also note that the staff of the Liberal Party of Australia have been involved in the malicious editing of Wikipedia before, when they held government. 121.216.230.139 ( talk) 15:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Jessica Owers ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I believe the article is autobiographical. See comment at [ [23]] Cuddy Wifter ( talk) 04:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, this article appears to be an autobiography based on her website and a website she created about the subject of her book. The article is positive but imo not overly so. No reliable secondary source is mentioned so there might also be notability problems. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Andrew Kemberling ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I hope the page I just created is in complience for NPOV, BLP and notability. I would appreciate some of you Smart People looking at and if need be editing my work. Paul, in Saudi ( talk) 11:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
David Attenborough ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Richard Attenborough ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
You have David Attenborough listed as the younger brother of Richard Attenborough. Not so. he is 86, his brother is 79 - Joseph Berlinger - I can't figure out how to edit. You have made the procedure extraordinarily difficult — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.81.134 ( talk) 17:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Discussion. Influential Jew, marriage commentary, RS?. The question is whether or not enough evidence exists supporting Zuckerberg being included as an American Jew as categories or Jewish as ethnicity in the infobox. Some editors invoke BLPCAT. Thoughts? Wikifan Be nice 21:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Putting aside Wikipedia policy for the moment and approaching this as a commonsense matter, the article body does a good job of explaining who Zuckerberg is from a religious/cultural perspective. The infobox and cats would destroy that good work and label him in a misleading fashion. Wikifan believes (I think) that Zuckerberg inherits his Jewish characteristics, whatever they might be, from his parents. I strongly disagree that just because one is born Jewish, one is a Jew. Some characteristics of human beings are genetic. I am unaware of any Jewish gene.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
While I've mostly stayed out of this issue, I have to say, for the record, both Newsweek ("Ashkenazi Jews are one of the most coherent genetic groups that exist") and The New York Times ("The shared genetic elements suggest that members of any Jewish community are related to one another as closely as are fourth or fifth cousins in a large population") and every other scholarly source support Jews being an ethnic group (or a "genetic" group, as Bbb23 says). I also am beginning to view Bbb23 as highly disruptive. Previously, he stated that people shouldn't be categorized as "Jewish" per "BLPcat" because the category does not differentiate between Jewish religion and Jewish ethnicity. Now, his opinion has shifted further towards whichever direction, in that people can't be described as being "ethnically" Jewish either! (because your ethnicity is not inherited from your parents? I hate to break it to you, but your parents are the only ones who transmit your ethnicity to you. There is no other way to become a member of an ethnic group. That's kind of how it works. "Identifying" with this culture or that does not make you a member of an ethnicity, nor does not identifying with it make you a non-member. Hence the term "ethnically Jewish" and not "culturally Jewish", two different things). Now, I don't know if Bbb23 is my fifth cousin or not, but he doesn't seem to understand the issues here; in fact, more and more so with every passing year since his position is more extreme now than it was a year ago. All Hallow's Wraith ( talk) 17:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Erik Spoelstra ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
It wouldn't hurt to get some more eyes on Erik Spoelstra. A recent piece of vandalism was reported by Forbes.com, and if his team loses tonight, things are going to get worse. A similar edit stayed up today for over thirty minutes. The article doesn't even have thirty people watching it yet, so any help would be appreciated. Zagalejo ^^^ 18:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
All looks OK right now. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Please, can an editor follow the developments in this page, It appears to me that someone is inserting bias material into the page, with no source. I have added "citation needed" for various claims, and tried to complete it by adding referenced material to the site, but much of the material has been removed and replaced by unreferenced material.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehdi313a ( talk • contribs) 12:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Juan Vargas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Someone removed info that I added that was referenced and accurate:
As a Senator he did not vote in favor of SB 810[3], a legislation that would have supported universal comprehensive healthcare to all Californians, which is part of the California State Democratic Party Platform[4]
I have replaced. Why was it removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.15.2.142 ( talk) 03:27, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Hal Erickson (author) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Is this BLP notable enough for a standalone article? The only bio info I have is minimal from 2005 at google books. Google search is hard to do on him because he is quoted so much. I started a user space page on him:
User:Canoe1967/Hal Erickson (author)--
Canoe1967 (
talk)
15:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Billie Jean King ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article begins with a section on her "personality" and features 6 paragraph long, block quotes. I find this grossly inappropriate and would like to remove all of the quotes. Any thoughts, suggestions, opinions?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Done
Chris Lintott ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Apologies if this is the wrong place to put this; the wikipedia page dealing with me shows an out of date affiliation and job title which is causing problems. I've posted a note on the relevant talk page ( Talk:Chris Lintott) but would appreciate it if someone could make the update or let me know if more information is needed. Thanks Chrislintott ( talk) 13:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Tomislav Nikolić ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The newly elected right-wing president of Serbia. I'm not fan of him (on the contrary, but that's not relevant here). The problem is that article has giant "controversies" section (about 40-50% of the article). Out of the 11 total sections (excluding References and External links) 7 sections are controversies. My main concern is "Accusations of war crimes" section, which is partially referenced to primary sources (press releases actually). There was never any indictment against him for war crimes, so I think this is the case where WP:BLPCRIME should be applied. There are other problematic sections like "University degree" also, but my primary concern is "Accusations of war crimes" section.-- В и к и T 19:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Glad to hear WP:BLPCRIME applies generally, Buku, but I did notice the limiting language that I quoted. Is there another section I have missed? Thanks. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Ali Khalid ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
He is of Pakistani decent. The article claimed his father was Pakistani and that his mother was Gilgiti. Gilgit is in Pakistan. Therefore, I must question the need for the info about his mother being from Gilgit relevant, unless Gilgitis specifically see themselves as drastically separate ethnically, which I could not seem to find evidence to support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaltonCastle ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Limited independent notability, imo - sent for discussion to - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Khalid ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - Youreally can 06:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Steve Jones (biologist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There's an interesting discussion at Talk:Steve Jones (biologist); briefly, Jones is known (as the article title would suggest) as a biologist but recently made some comments about global warming. Another editor wishes to add something like "It is not known what his credentials are to say this" to the article which I think is somewhat inappropriate. I would prefer any criticism of Jones to be reliably sourced and neutrally worded. Other opinions please? -- John ( talk) 10:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Moved from
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
Jim1138 (
talk)
18:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Fang Zhouzi seems to be subject of an edit war and attack by people trying to damage his reputation. Allegations of voyeurism, sexual assault, and plagiarism being added. References are in Chinese and difficult to understand. I have not left any notices of this posting to any editors as I am not sure who should be notified. This article likely needs an expert. Thanks
Jim1138 (
talk)
09:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
NXIVM ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please see User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_106, Section title "Plea", right near the bottom, where JW would have me bring this matter to you. He has, see the talk page of the articles in question and the JW talk page archives, seems to express concern that this is an important and difficult issue in need of the attention of informed BLP editors. What should we do? Let me know if you would like me to repeat this plea again here or whether, as I would hope, this word to the wise is enough. Chrisrus ( talk) 15:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Elizabeth Warren ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm concerned about what I see as BLP violations on Talk:Elizabeth Warren. It may be though that I'm being oversensitive, so I'm seeking outside opinion, Within this section Talk:Elizabeth_Warren#Undue_Weight_and_Coatrack_in_Senate_run_section. we have the use of pejoritive terms that have been used by certian opinion columnists. i.e. "Liawatha". I feel these should be redacted and not repeated unless it's specifically about a suggested inclusion. My opinion has been disputed by a 3rd editor.-- Cube lurker ( talk) 17:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)edited to fix spelling error pointed out by 24dot
I've elected to leave a general reminder as a start, but would welcome some outside administrative opinions. I think this page is likely to be sort of a test case for how we handle high-profile political biographies, and politically motivated editing and commentary, in an election season. Hopefully things will be smoother than in 2008. MastCell Talk 17:06, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Lieawatha has an "e", you know. I can see the logic of either spelling, but the reality is that most columnists are inserting the e (google compare).
I hope that wasn't the spelling error you "fixed"! 66.105.218.38 ( talk) 20:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
This is a Senate campaign, whether you like it or not, the controversies of a campaign are fair game. The sobriquets "Lie-awatha" and "Faux-cahontas" are in extensive use throughout the State, and local radio talk shows have sponsored contests to find the best Elizabeth Warren "Indian" names. They all refer to the the controversy included in the page, are in wide use, and are relevant to the campaign, in the sense that when a stumble becomes so bad that it is a constant source of water-cooler talk, it at some level affects the race. -- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 16:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Political meme I guess the question comes down to whether these have become a/some political meme(s) in a Senate race, in which case they are absolutely valid inclusions. Obviously a casual insult does not warrant inclusion, but a meme does. Memes, to head off the next argument, are seldom kind, but their effectiveness is related to how well they bring attention to an issue. -- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 16:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Michael Roach ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm very sorry to have to raise this again, but recent news articles about the events surrounding Ian Thorson's death seem to have triggered a new bunch of non-NPOV edits to the Michael Roach wikipedia page. Since one of the people doing these edits has accused me of COI, I would appreciate it if someone here who is actually neutral could look at the last few edits to the article and see what you think. Abhayakara ( talk) 04:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Based on the lack of response above, I used my judgment to edit the article. User:Nomoskedasticity is now engaging in an edit war over on the Michael Roach page and is making accusations of sockpuppetry in addition to his previous accusations of non-NPOV. Some neutral analysis would _really_ be appreciated. Abhayakara ( talk) 05:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
[25] shows a revert of a failed attempt to make the content of a section NPOV - it has the edit summary of "NPOV -- avoiding overemphasis on what Rogers says himself" which I consider a strange position considering what the actual claims ascribed to him are, and what the implicit claims in Wikipedia's voice are. Please look. Collect ( talk) 12:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Britney Spears ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The personal life section keeps getting deleted & put back in her career. It really needs to stay in its own section so readers don't have to read her whole career just to find out what happened in her personal life. Stoopsklan ( talk) 20:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Sheldon Souray ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone please take a look at the article and the recent battle over his marital history? I've run out of reverts. I did start a topic on the Talk page, little good it's done so far. Also, same IP is editing the Angelica Bridges article.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 02:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Mentioning she did not deserve the part for the role of Goddess Parvati is entirely wrong as mentioned... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.227.157 ( talk) 08:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Roger Pearson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) It is rather well documented that Pearson has founded and been active in several antisemitic, neo-nazi, and racialist organizations through his life time - described in various books. An editor feels that mentioning this biases the article against Pearson and removes this sourced information, citing WP:UNDUE. I think some third and fourth opinions could be good - I have reverted the removal but honestly I am not sure about how best to cover this kind of thing. Pearson is a controversial person and has received lots of negative publicity mostly for his political work, his academic work is not comparably well known. But it is true that it not exactly flattering to have this stuff in you BLP, and that it does pose some policy relevant questions. IF anyone can chip n at the talk page I'd be happy. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 02:03, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I noticed the Wiki article on the Northern League (United Kingdom) says the organization was neo-nazi and was founded by him. IMO if the information is based on reliable secondary sources, and was not an isolated incident in his life (which it does not seem to be), then it is appropriate in the article. The other editor can focus on providing information on his academic work. Coaster92 ( talk) 05:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am the subject of the article in question and have made edits to compensate for libelous commissions and omissions as previously published. In making these corrections I have referenced Official Court transcripts that are the authoritative research source on the particular and critical matters footnoted. So far as I know the transcripts are not publicly quoted elsewhere than in my own book entitled Justice in Paradise, McGill-Queen's University Press, Montreal and Kingston, 1999. My affidavit evidence is also reproduced in the book attesting to the fidelity of the quotations to the whole truth upon pain of prosecution for perjury. The transcripts speak for themselves and no opinion from the book is mentioned. As previously presented the article was sufficiently erroneous that a COI check on its author might well be in order just in case he or she has ever been, or might still be connected in some fashion to the indigenous rights industry that is constituted and funded by federal government agencies in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand. Since I acted on behalf of Indian Tribes in bitter opposition to the allegedly usurping federally incorporated or endorsed Indian bands or "First Nations," and since those entities are mortal competitors for the indigenous interest, any such relationship with the industry could be an alternative explanation to paucity of sources and scandalous inadequacy that I have attempted to counterbalance with the most cogent evidence currently available.-- BruceAllanClark ( talk) 15:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
What parts of the article do you think damage your reputation? We have a strict policy here ( Wikipedia:BLP#Presumption_in_favor_of_privacy) regarding the way Wikipedia handles articles involving the biography of a living person. While I can't promise that material will be changed, if you can be clear about what you object to, that would be very helpful in moving forward. Thanks again, Lord Roem ( talk) 22:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Please could you comment on the talk page of the article, this really isn't the correct venue for discussing changes to Bruce Allan Clark (lawyer) Thank you. Theroadislong ( talk) 13:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Jeffrey Docking ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There have been some IP blankings at Jeffrey Docking, removing material about a football firing controversy. here here and at a related article here. As far as I can tell, everything there seems to be compliant with BLP policy, but I'd like some input on that. All of the material there is right out of reliable sources, is cited to death, and the sources are archived. I don't even think the material is all that controverisal, but someone out there disagrees. I just want to head off any issues. The IPs seem to be sourced to the college. -- GrapedApe ( talk) 15:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Randeep Hooda ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Wikipedia page of a person by name Randeep Hooda is written by a person/persons in an obviously biased and opinionated manner. The page is meant for information on the person, and not meant to be an author's biography or personal opinion. Please flag the article as inappropriate. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.194.170.230 ( talk) 00:15, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Herb Caen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Should the subject be called an American or SF based writer in the lede. Please see talk page for discussion. Thank you. -- Mollskman ( talk) 18:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello everone. I am having difficulties keeping this page Badshah Munir Bukhari in keeping with WP:BLP guidelines, particularly their three core content policies: Neutral point of view (NPOV), Verifiability (V), and No original research (NOR). In terms of verifiability, one editor (IP 121.52.147.11) keeps inserting information that contradicts the neutral (third-party) source in the article: a university departmental webpage. For example, the website calls Bukhari "Mr" (in a dept which lists Drs and Professors) and identifies him having master's level quals, not a PhD. Yet "PhD" keeps reurning to the page. On the Talk Page there is also an accusation from another editor that these unhelpful edits are being made by Badshah Munir Bukhari himself. On that I cannot comment. I do not know. Please have a look. Thank you. George Custer's Sabre ( talk) 10:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Christian Settipani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having difficulty with an edit of a biography of Christian Settipani who has done some research in early medieval history and prosopography. Mr. Settipani is popular in some quarters and some other editors had written the article in a way that attracted a determination that there were problems of neutrality, the reason why he was notable and adequate citation. I added some materials to explain his notability but at first only cited a source (Halfond) who was critical of one of Settipani's publications. Halfond is a minor academic who does not exercise much influence in this field but I felt for the sake of neutrality and relevance it was a good citation. Pmanderson objected that I could not have derived any of the positive statements made regarding Settipani's reception by historical academia based on Halfond's article. I made some objections and explanations but left the section deleted and went about searching for the specific citations necessary to support anything I would later want to add again. Before I had completed this, another editor (with whom I have no connection) apparently found Pmanderson's action capricious or abusive and reinserted the deleted portion. Whatever I felt about that I recognized the deficiency of the original contribution and quickly added about a half dozen citations to the primary researchers in the field and their take on Settipani's work. I put Halfond's review back into context and I think anwswered the few of Pmanderson's objections that were the most meritorious. Then yesterday, Bobrayner objected to the lack of support for some aspect of Mr. Settipani's employment (a completely different section than I am working on and having nothing whatever to do with it) and summarily deleted the corrected section that I had just worked on because apparently he could not see why the other editor had put it back. He clearly had not reviewed the corrective changes. Having in fact already born the burden I was obliged to and made extensive changes, I reinstated the disputed language with a lengthy note on the talk page. Bobrayner deleted again citing again the citation needed designation he had placed on the unrelated entry (which in fact I do not think he has deleted). I have reposted the material and asked nicely again that he raise his objections to the extensive sources some of which I quoted at length and some of which, I think in fact most of which are accessible on line and for which I provided the URLs, and that he leave the material intact until he has explained why citation to the leading academics' in this field comments on the subject of the article are irrelevant. I have gone to considerable length to explain the changes in the appropriate place and would regard further deletion without taking up the sufficiency of the changes to be abusive. Please advise GradyEdwardLoy ( talk) 13:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Charles Harpole ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article appears to be written by the subject. Page contains very few citations; however there is a note at the bottom instructing any reader who needs citations: "it is up to them to do the research to get that". All other references are within the text, such as: "Reference the college catalogues of each university for citation "proof" of these jobs held", although not cited properly and not available. A paragraph, also likely written by the subject, at the bottom of the page questions Wikipedia's citation policy. The subject seems to be under the impression that this is his personal website, as opposed to a qualified source. Mdechris ( talk) 14:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Huge numbers of people who are Mormons who served in any foreign countries for any length of time are now being categorrized as "American expartiates in (country)". This includes people both living and dead in vast profusion (Brigham Young, Jr. was listed for 8 countries!). [27] is typical of this strange set of edits. [28] was the one which led me to this trail. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 16:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
In June, a biography of a living person, Michael Jingozian, was tagged with the following three objections:
--“This biography of a living person needs additional references or sources for verification.” --“It is written like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view.” --“It may have been edited by a contributor who has a close connection with its subject.”
I’ve relied on these objections to rewrite the biography of Mr. Jingozian. My goal is to ensure that the biography meets all of Wikipedia’s standards.
The rewritten biography was posted on Wikipedia in early August; however the same three objections are still listed.
The URL is: Michael Jingozian ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could you kindly let me know if the rewritten biography has been reviewed, and whether the biography requires further editing to satisfy any Wikipedia objections?
Thank you for your assistance.
Alan Lohner
50.53.73.223 ( talk) 17:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Moved from WP:Requests_for_comment/Request_board Coastside ( talk) 18:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Valerie Sinason ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I would like comment on the Sinason biography with a view to deleting it entirely. Right now the bio treats Sinason as a crank.
The problem is Sinason's record of her treatment of people who report a history of satanic ritual abuse. Wikipedia has determined that SRA is a fringe view. As such Sinason's involvement in the issue means that she must be treated as a crank because to do otherwise might appear to validate SRA as not fringe. I don't think it is fair to use Sinason's bio to advance the Wikipedia judgement that SRA is fringe. The entry for SRA does a lengthy enough job of making the fringe argument. The Sinason bio should be deleted. As it stands it is a kind of witchhunt. 86.162.221.34 ( talk) 19:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC) Moved from WP:Requests_for_comment/Request_board Coastside ( talk) 19:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
This link is stated as Tara Palmer-Tomkinson's 'BBC Profile' but it simply leads you to an article (not a profile) that is nearly 10 years old. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaH82 ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Nikos Alefantos ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article contains very few sources and potentially defamatory material. This person isn't popular outside of a targeted niche in one country. Article generally misses sources and citations, because there are none to be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnF30 ( talk • contribs) 19:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Luka Magnotta ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Some of the talk page may be against BLP. I put a big bold section at the top that may help. It is a long read. Warning: it deals with a recent murder investigation and is rather graphic in places. I haven't read the article much, but it seems okay.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 21:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
As Liev's father, I would like to improve some of the information that pertains to me and my relationship with my son and his mother. I would like the phrase "commune" stricken from the description of our home in Canada. We were a nuclear family on a privately owned ten acre property. There is a slimey reference to my lifestyle as corrupted by practices of "free love". Not the case, in fact. Without going into details which might cast aspersions on Liev's mother, we were as a family dealing with issues of serious fear and paranoia. Unfounded charges were made. I'm aware that the New Yorker article did little to explore or diminish the falseness of those charges. When, in flight from a custody case she initiated in Canada, she removed him to New York, I was denied all access to him until his older brother, six years later phoned from New York and offered to arrange a visit if I could get to New York on a weekend when Liev would be in his brother's care. I was desperate to see him; I sold a heifer calf I was raising to keep the meeting. I subsequently, on the salary of a common high school teacher, paid tuition for both of Liev's private school high school years, all three of his undergraduate college years, the year of his training at RADA, and his three years of graduate school at Yale. It would help the record to understand that, unlike any of Liev's New York relatives, I loved theater, was a busy and committed actor at Dartmouth, and later in my twenty wonderful Canadian years helped start a theater department at the local community college and worked to create an actor training program. Also that I was twenty-six at Liev's birth, not twenty-two. I don't believe Liev ever wrestled; I did.
We have managed a somewhat strained relationship since. I admire his talent deeply, love him as well as he allows, and I'm able. I've seen all but three of his New York stage shows. He just paid me a profoundly appreciated visit with Naomi and Sasha and Kai in honor of my seventieth birthday. I'm immensely proud of him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.180.222 ( talk • contribs)
Moved from wp:Requests_for_comment/Request_board (some issues appear to remain open, e.g., use of "commune") Coastside ( talk) 07:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
NLT --- Collapsed |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Subject: False, defamatory and hate mjaterial about me on wikipedia Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 22:26:51 +1030 Please remove the entire page at: Raymond Hoser This material is false, defamatory and incites hatred. Attempts to edit are continually blocked trolls within wikipedia including users Mokele and User:HCA Who have automated settings to revert to lies any pages we try to alter. The webpage also breaches trademarks as does your "snakeman" pages so please remove them as well. As it is not within your ability to publish truth or abide by the laws of trademarks and misleading conduct, please remove the pages forthwith. Furthermore remove the words "Raymond_Hoser" from any and all wikipedia url's including non-English ones. A copy of this e-mail is being sent to my lawyers. Thank you. Snake Man Raymond Hoser Snakebusters - Australia's best reptiles Phones: (Redacted) |
Re: the supposedly biographical entry on Catherine Chatterley
Catherine D Chatterley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The paragraph dealing with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is polemical and not biographical. One might say that she has been a public defender of the CMHR but to make (unfounded) allegations about the critics of the CMHR and to accuse them of anti-Semitism is unfair, potentially libellous.
A biographical entry should confine itself to facts, not the opinions of the author. Wikipedia should not be promoting dubious and even mendacious texts disguised as biographical notes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.142.54 ( talk • contribs)
Vanity piece. Creator is a new editor, persistently removing maintenance templates. 76.248.149.47
![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Zhang Ziyi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There has been a frequent libelous and defamatory reporting noted as a 'Controversy' under the Zhang Ziyi biographical page. The actress has denied the unfounded claims made by Apple Daily and is taking legal action against the tabloid. By posting the false report on Wikipedia, the authors are only further slandering the actress. A libelous tabloid making a false claim (with no quoted sources) against a well respected professional cannot be considered a 'controversy.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.6.31.226 ( talk) 03:13, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Rajesh Hamal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I've got to head to bed, but I just pulled "rumors" of affairs and mental illness out fo this article, it's large, essentially unsourced, and could easily have other issues going on in it. Additional eyes appreciated. -- joe decker talk to me 06:26, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Tommy Morrison ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I was reviewing this article on an unrelated OTRS matter and can see there is some edit-warring going on between an IP (who claims to be the subject) and another editor as to whether to include specific details regarding the subject's medical history. Perhaps someone here could eyeball it to make sure all is BLP-compliant with regard to the disputed material? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 20:38, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Paul Bettany ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The following appears in the Personal Life section:
The quintuplets, Abigail, Mary, Kristina and Benjamin, born on September 21, 2007 and the twins, Anastacia and Cecillia, born on November 24, 2008, are fruits of their relationship with the Brazilian, Lidiane.
I believe this may be an error because I cannot find evidence of these children in any other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LASwartz ( talk • contribs) 01:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Okay, while I'm not sure this is the right forum for this, I think it will work. I recently marked Yvonne Wartiainen, Shani Haider, and Arash Howaida for BLP PROD. Yvonne Wartiainen and Shani Haider had their PROD templates removed, but I'm not sure if the references provided are reliable sources, and I would like a second opinion. As for Arash Howaida: it was speedily deleted under G11 and A7, then recreated. Again, I'm not sure if the sources are reliable, and would like an outside look at it. David 1217 02:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Has attracted several "new editors" each of who proposes the exact same edits founded in blogs and "court records" etc. which are on their face contentious (that he was associated with illegal offshore gambling operations and criminals) relying heavily on the blog "Atlanta Unfiltered". I am a teensy bit suspicious that such new editors make exactly the same edits - might someone opine on the remote possibility that they are acting in a less than proper manner? Cheers. Collect ( talk) 02:49, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
No -- but I consider such edits as [5] to be UNDUE and violative of WP:BLP, and quite improper. And people who reinsert the edits of socks are quite likely to be viewed enablers of their behaviour. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 14:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
John Messuri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article contains the following libelous sentence:
"He took over for Richard Dicaprio, after continuous struggling seasons."
The above is not true and is defamatory to the reputation of Hall of Fame coach Richard DeCaprio. When googling "Richard DeCaprio Arlington" this is the first story that comes up. Messuri did not take over for DeCaprio after "continuous struggling seasons". That is a subjective statement about the quality of Arlington's Hockey seasons and paints Coach DeCaprio in a bad light. Remove this language immediately.
John Messuri — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.68.168 ( talk) 11:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Political Scrapbook ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Edits made to insert unsourced claims defamatory to living person (editor of a political news site). [8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.194.133.187 ( talk) 14:29, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Someone keeps changing the information on Edgar Mejia to say that he plays for Real Madrid on loan from Barcelona. Attempts have been made to correct the errors, but eventually someone logs back on to edit the page with false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.8.39.93 ( talk) 21:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Kitty101423 ( talk · contribs) has repeatedly (over more than a year) added vast amounts of original reasearch information, much of which is obviously libellous ("The headmaster also showed poor judgement in running the school, particularly in...", "Some parents are now asking why the headmaster is still employed by the school"). Latest edits here [9]. She has ignored repeated requests to discuss on the talk page. -- Lo2u ( T • C) 11:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Denis Mitchison ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The reference to "Graeme Mitchison", a living mathematician, as a "dilettante", could be offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.169.9.14 ( talk) 12:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Anthony Hanemaayer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can other editors weigh in on what should be done with this article? This man was wrongly convicted of a serious crime and was ultimately acquitted and released. The WP article, until I removed most of it, consisted mostly unsourced material about the case, including negative material about the man. I am thinking that this is a classic example of WP:BLP1E and should be sent to AFD. What do others think? -- Slp1 ( talk) 17:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Sent to AfD. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 13:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Andy Hamilton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
it has been edited to say that andy died on 4 june 2012. he did not it was the saxophonist andy hamilton who died
Adonis Stevenson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Potentially Libelous Third paragraph of "Professional Career" section, final sentence. Alleges, as factual, illegal bias on part of specific referee. Alleges corruption. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.82.146.3 ( talk) 18:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Matthew Grow ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I just placed a Prod on him as "not notable" - as I can not find anywhere that a publications director of a church meets general notability guidelines .. but would more than welcome people proving me wrong. Thanks. Collect ( talk) 20:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Come on, folks, it's really not all that complicated. The subject's notability is not related to his status in the Mormon church; rather, his notability is due to his being a preeminent historian in his field, published by academic presses and reviewed in innumerable journals, etc. End of story.These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons.--- wp:N
As a side issue (which should be disregarded, as far as mere wp:N is concerned), Dr. Grow's ecclesiastical functionary title is, um, "notable"...as a detail--a mere detail--within any complete biography of him.
Sure, issues such as bias/conflict of interest/etc. come into play when evaluating the contributions of people of a particular subgroup. Such issues must be taken into account when using such scholars' works. --By way of example, absolutely, historians among the descendants of the Fancher-Baker party give short shrift to historians working for the Mormon church and vice versa. (Note that References/MASSACRE PERPETRATORS.pdf this F-B party descendents site's pdf lists novelist and historian Sally Denton as an authority but neglects to mention Ronald W. Walker and Glen M. Leonard, whose tome on the ill-fated emigrant wagon train following the Old Spanish Trail westward was published by Oxford Univ.: both of whom work for the LDS. Yet, the Mormon studies fanboys/girls that edit the WP article on the event tend to give short shrift to popularizer Denton (or even Jon Krakauer), showing comparatively more favor to Walker or Leonard (while also taking into account their ostensibly pro-LDS frame of reference).)
Yet do such considerations mean we must reflexively ghettoize scholars whose expertise is especially regional or else within a field of study pertaining to a particular religion or ethnic subgroup? No.
Relatedly, how must we take into account what a person's day job is, when determining notability of his or her academic or creative output? The answer: we pay it mind to the degree it is relevant. Eg: a hobo whose poetry, copied at library Xerox machines, is all the rage...but only among other hobos...has no encyclopedic notability, per wp:N ( wp:RS, etc.). Yet, if this same hobo becomes renown as "the hobo poet" and becomes published by a prestige publisher and his or her work reviewed in reliable sources, then he or she is notable, despite the very common day um "job"/status within society.
Looking up the "innumerable" journals: Googlescholar finds only two of his articles cited by anyone at all (one article is cited by 4, another by 2). Far from "innumerable" this is a minor author at best. He appears in absolutely zero instances in the NYT. No academic notability, as he appears to be an "Assistant Professor at the University of Southern Indiana " only ( [11]). Wikipedia does not accept that title as conferring notability. And yes, WP:IAR exists, but I doubt you will find backing for eliding notability standards here. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 15:34, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Charles Lane (journalist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article falsely claims that I was fired from my job at The New Republic and otherwise distorts the details of my career. It is clearly not intended as an objective presentation but the opposite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.49.173 ( talk) 00:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
It is false -- and unsourced here -- that Marty Peretz privately blamed Charles Lane for Steve Glass's fabrications. It is also false that Lane wrote disparagingly about obese people, or that he faced criticism for doing so, other than a single erroneous column in the City Paper of Washington DC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.49.173 ( talk) 00:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The BLP grossly abused the sources which made clear that Lane was the "cleaner-upper" who got rid of Glass -- and in no way the one who was involved otherwise. The other bits also editorialised contrary to what the actual sources said - and should be chastised therefor. I did leave in the blogger saying Lane should "chuck off" as it indicated the level of source used. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 13:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
This article is being repeatedly vandalised by having verifiable factual content deleted and links to blog opinion inserted. Maherus ( talk) 06:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Can other editors look at the refs in this diff and indicate whether they think they meet WP:RS for purposes of this BLP? thanks. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 12:14, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Alive (1993 film) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Several months ago I tried to correctly edit the cast sub-section of this film, but was informed that my edits were unsubstantiated, despite the fact that on a Wikipedia page of the actor in dispute (Miguel Ferrer) confirms my original edit. Under the page for this film, Alive, you have John Malchovich listed as the Narrator (Uncredited) On the wiki page for Miguel Ferrer, he is listed as the uncredited narrator of this film (See filmography" Both articles cannot be true; one has to be wrong. According to the DVD that I just watched, it is in fact, Miguel Ferrer who was the uncredited narrator--NOT John Malchovich. The fact that the IMDB also lists John Malchovich as the narrator, just shows that their source is not an accurate one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mytimeistoday ( talk • contribs) 19:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Howard Fineman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hello, there are two minor errors that warrant correction in the Howard Fineman biographical article. I spotted these errors because I work with Howard Fineman. Because my employment relationship presents a WP:COI, I was wondering if someone here on the BLP/N would be able to review and make these two corrections:
Thanks for your help. If any further sources are needed to justify the changes suggested above, please let me know and I'd be happy to provide those. Cheers, Jeff Bedford ( talk) 16:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to look into this so thoroughly. I submit that we take a closer look at the phrase "who is Jewish."
While WP:BLP does not cover this type of content directly, WP:BLPCAT states that "Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources." Put more briefly, religious inclusion requires both (a) self-identification, and (b) relevance (with RS) to notability.
The spirit of WP:BLP would also suggest that a living person ought to have a right to self-identify as part of a religious group. While the subject of this article attended a predominantly Jewish high school and was bar mitzvahed several decades ago, the subject has not self-identified as being Jewish, and his religion is not related to his notability.
Based on these factors, it does not seem to be fitting to speculate that the subject of this article "is Jewish." Bus stop, what are your thoughts on this? Could a few others could weigh in as well, in order to help establish consensus? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 19:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, it is helpful that several are weighing in, as this will help in establishing consensus on what is, naturally, a complex topic. "Raised in a Jewish family" seems accurate. The only question that remains is, doesn't this sentence sound a bit odd with the religious background inserted into it? It now reads:
His first journalism work involved writing for this regional newspaper about state politics and the environment, but neither these subjects, nor the paper itself or his journalism career are tied to the religion of his parents.
For instance, the article about Mel Gibson mentions his religious upbringing because it is directly related to his notability (he directed a prominent film on a religious subject, Passion of the Christ). However, the article about Josh Weinstein does not mention his religious upbringing because that is not directly tied to his notability (he was a writer for The Simpsons). It would be odd to read a sentence such as 'Weinstein, who was raised in a _______ family, began writing for The Simpsons in...'
Since Howard Fineman is notable as a political journalist and this notability is not tied to his religious beliefs, what are your thoughts on revising this content to a state where it does not include the religious qualifiers? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 14:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Settled, I trust. Collect ( talk) 15:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
off topic, please rethink this |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Wikidemon, the way you put this makes a lot of sense. I just spoke with Howard Fineman about this and he indicated that he'd prefer the Wikipedia article about him refrain from discussing his religion or religious upbringing. He feels that since his reason for notability (as a journalist) is not related to his religious upbringing. I've informed him of WP:OWN and WP:COI, so he understands that this is a Wikipedia article about him, and not his Wikipedia article. He trusts the community of editors here to ultimately make the right decisions. Does that context help in establishing consensus on this? Jeff Bedford ( talk) 19:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible for a few other BLP/N experts to weigh in on this thread and come to a conclusion? As noted above, I have a COI, so I would prefer to limit myself to presenting information, leaving it up to you all to make the editorial decision. Cheers, Jeff Bedford ( talk) 13:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Jeremy Wade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Jeremy Wade was born March 23, 1956...not May 5th. This was confirmed on Icon Films, Bristol website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.103.182 ( talk) 17:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Armstrong & Getty ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article is about an AM radio morning show that covers most of Northern CA. The hosts continually invite listeners to "spice up" or "vandalize" the article, leading to outrageous edits such as this most recent diff and this diff chosen at random. I don't know how to address this. Maybe semi protection to discourage anonymous IPs?-- William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 18:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Daniel Mattes ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article is written like beeing a PR for Daniel Mattes. Several sources are not reliable. Comments like "Bill Gates of the Alps" are not objective. Instead of linking an original source of a newspaper there are links to Daniel Mattes own flickr account.
Salzburger Fenster is a very local magazine. Beeing there on the list of 100 most important people is not worth mentioning in an international encyclopedia. Also this cite was written that it reads like he was 54th most important citicen of Austria, which is wrong, as he was just on the list for Salzburg.
The whole article lacks objectivity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.26.99.61 ( talk) 13:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Bernhard Goetz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Overview: It looks like there is a concerted effort to insert unsourced accusations of animal abuse at Bernhard Goetz. One of the editors fighting against this claims to be Bernhard Goetz.
Examples:
User:RRassendyll says things on Talk:Bernhard Goetz that clearly violate our BLP policy [14]
User:RRassendyll inserts the same BLP-violating material at Bernhard Goetz [15]
172.129.57.123 reverts [16]
172.129.57.123 posts to Bernhard Goetz, claims to be "Bernie Goetz" [17]
162.83.220.208 inserts the same BLP-violating material at Bernhard Goetz [18]
User:Djenner files a case at WP:DRN naming User:R. Rassendyll and User:Bernhard Goetz [19] I close it because neither user exists. (Note: "Rudolf Rassendyll" is a fictional character from The Prisoner of Zenda)
User:Djenner argues for inclusion of material despite failing WP:V [20]
There is a lot more going on, but it's hard to follow because of shifting IPs and users editing while not logged on. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 01:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
We could use some input on this article. We have an IP who is insisting because one person referred to this actor as Clive Warren that "He is sometimes called Clive Warren" and that fact should be included in the lede. If in you examination of this you feel that the info is notable just leave a note here and I will accept your judgement(s) on the matter. Thanks in advance for your time in looking at this. MarnetteD | Talk 19:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Stan Jolley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am Stan Jolley's son-in-law. I have tried twice to correct and add information to the Wikipedia profile on Stan Jolley. This includes information about his death on 6/4/12 and additions to his credits in the film industry. User "Lugnuts" has twice reverted my work. I believe he is calling for citations. I and my wife, Stan's heir, are the source regarding his death. We have not published his obituary yet. As for his film credits, he supplied them to me on paper - the same credits he supplied IMDB and are published there. I noted that on my revision, but Lugnuts chose to ignore and change the bio back. Since Stan Jolley is the source on himself, and I am the source for info on his passing, how is this a violation of the terms regarding biographys? How can I get my work put back permanently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaisen ( talk • contribs) 00:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Vint Cerf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
He is now listed as British computer scientist not American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.33.59 ( talk) 16:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Just changed, all reliable references show that he was born in New Haven Conneticut. NO sources were shown or added in to say otherwise. I've also left a note on the page of the individual that made the change. User:KoshVorlon Talk 17:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Jean Morton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Jean Morton returned to the UK a few years ago. She died on May 26th, 2012, aged 91, in Beechfield Nursing Home, Lichfield. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.107.214 ( talk) 19:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Seán Sherlock ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Has IPs adding a table of expenses [22] for the person - relying entirely on a primary source, and without trying for discussion thereon. Collect ( talk) 20:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Patrick Greene (activist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
My name is Patrick Greene. I am the "activist" that the article is all about. First of all I am not a Christian anymore. Second, I was never an officer in the Air Force. I was an enlisted man for 8 1/2 years. From 1968-77. Third, I never filed any lawsuit against Henderson County. Forth, the rally had nothing to do with me. I didn't even know about the Nativity scene issue until after the rally. You spelled Jessica Crye's name wrong. Lastly I would like to know who put in all the information about me, considering a lot of it is wrong. Please forward my email address to that person, so I can set them straight about me.
thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.11.150.125 ( talk) 00:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Ruthanna Hopper ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
It has been brought to my attention that my biography (Ruthanna Hopper) on Wikipedia is not accurate. If there is an editor who can help me, I would greatly appreciate it. The edit is fairly simple. I co-wrote two novels, "Celebutantes" in 2008, a New York Times bestseller and "Beneath A Starlet Sky", published in 2011. http://us.macmillan.com/beneathastarletsky/AmandaGoldberg I've tried to make the changes myself but have been unsuccessful. The biography has my occupation listed as an actress and film producer, which is not accurate. I've made some appearances in movies but I am an author. I would greatly appreciate some assistance on this. Thank you!
Best, Ruthanna Hopper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Childofthe60s ( talk • contribs) 04:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Bob Hoskins ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
PLEASE ADD THE FILM "THE HOUSE THAT MARY BUILT" TO HIS CREDIT. JUST WATCHED IT ON T.V. COULD NOT FIND THE FILM ANYWHERE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.137.4 ( talk) 23:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Catherine Bosley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Once again, someone's added a separate section with an apparently well known "wardrobe malfunction" type incident, without inline citations. See here for previous discussion of this on this noticeboard.
The IP concerned seems well intentioned, but I've reverted them here because I don't have time to sift through all the news reports and work out what exactly is due weight for this and exactly which facts can be sourced properly.
If anyone has time to add a brief, properly sourced, and appropriate weight mention of this to the article, that would be great. If not, it may need another year's semi-protection. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 04:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Owen Jones (writer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Someone re-adding childish vandalism after I reverted. Thanks. Itsmejudith ( talk) 14:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Coleen Nolan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article contains paragraph "In January 2007, Nolan courted further controversy when, during a debate on Loose Women about gay adoption, she stated her opinion that gay people should not be allowed to adopt children,[27] and said that "there's only so much I want to accept".[12]. There are NO sources for this. The sources cited are false pages, but I have been warned by Wikipedia for trying to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.179.73 ( talk) 14:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Gregory Stanton ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A BLP issue has been raised re Gregory Stanton article in a DRN post. Libel has been asserted. Any help from BLP experts would be appreciated. Please post any comments at the DRN page, not here, to keep the discussion centralized. -- Noleander ( talk) 15:43, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Nazima ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Nazima is still alive and she lives in Mumbai with her family — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.125.204.19 ( talk) 17:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hi Everyone,
Sorry to have to stick this back on here seeing that it has been here just last week. It was generally agreed at the time that a number of SPA's had been involved in editing the page making it look more and more like an attack page.
The article was cleaned up with collective effort to an acceptable standard albeit short.
It now looks like another SPA has been created smearing negative remarks all over the page.
Sources are used in some places (Under the France) section, referring to court proceedings, the article referenced is from the 13th of April, the actual court hearing was not until the 17th and the outcome was indeed very different from the source quoted.
If you google the individual and his companies it becomes clear that they have restructured their business and that there has been a number of redundancies in the last year, to me it looks like disgruntled individuals are using wikipedia as a means of "getting even" in this individual and his companies.
It was suggested at one point that the page was to be semi-protected for a short while. Would it not be a good idea to clean it up again, and semi-protect it until SPA's loose interest in this article? I would be quite happy to chip in when it comes to this, but it feels a bit like we're swimming upstream as every time something is cleaned up it is undone. Sweboi ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mike James ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I do not think this article should be deleted, but it needs some major work. NPOV is definitely in question here, as well as some serious citation issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Js sherlock ( talk • contribs) 17:37, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
User:CarmeloLisciotto ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I deleted the above userpage and blocked the user for impersonation and creating an attack page. It has been pointed out to me that prior to vandalisms, this was a former copyright violation and self-advertisement, but definitely not an attack page and probably not an impersonation. I just want some folks' eyes besides my own on this account; and want to apologize for insufficient due diligence. -- Orange Mike | Talk 21:07, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
There has been a dispute at LaRouche movement over the application of WP:BLPCRIME. As you can see in this edit, one editor says that it is proper to include numerous accusations of criminal activity where no convictions were obtained, as long as the specific names of the accused are not included. I personally think that it would be more proper and less weaselly if there were names included, and that the best solution is to omit the accusations. But I wanted to bring it to this board for discussion. Waalkes ( talk) 21:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Mushahid Ullah Khan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The information that is present in the article is not correct. The reference is not correct and information that is put in is not referenced. Please remove it ASAP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.19.41 ( talk) 00:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Malcolm Gladwell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A bit of an argument going on at Talk:Malcolm_Gladwell#.27Blatant_corruption.27 over a continuing edit war -- I think that the section title suggests what it's about. Rather to my surprise, there are now experienced editors on both sides of the argument. Oh well ... let's have a few more experienced editors, and then perhaps the matter will be settled, one way or another. -- Hoary ( talk) 10:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You're wrong, of course. The issue is being dealt with at "Blatant corruption". (Incidentally, we all already believe in peace and fucking; no need to harp on the matter.) -- Hoary ( talk) 06:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Ponnala Lakshmaiah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone take a look at this one, it needs editing with a chainsaw. Section headings like As Icon of Inspiration, Man OF Integrity & Passion, Life of the Sparkling Star show where the BLP issue lies. This is an article about a politician, so some COI editing seems to be going on. 109.77.113.165 ( talk) 10:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The article was previously bad, but not embarrassingly/hilariously so. I've reverted a lot of edits to restore it to its previously (bad) state. This is not satisfactory (and neither of course is it hilarious). Hoary ( talk) 12:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Craig Thomson affair ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have discovered that this borderline attack page on a Member of Parliament (under voluntary suspension from the Australian Labor Party) is being edited by at least one member of the Liberal Party of Australia. Thus there is a huge WP:COI. WP:BLP is being totally ignored; unreliable sources which border on the edge of defamation (under Australian law) are being cited and then added to the Wikipedia article in a libelous manner. Please also note that the staff of the Liberal Party of Australia have been involved in the malicious editing of Wikipedia before, when they held government. 121.216.230.139 ( talk) 15:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Jessica Owers ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I believe the article is autobiographical. See comment at [ [23]] Cuddy Wifter ( talk) 04:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, this article appears to be an autobiography based on her website and a website she created about the subject of her book. The article is positive but imo not overly so. No reliable secondary source is mentioned so there might also be notability problems. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Andrew Kemberling ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I hope the page I just created is in complience for NPOV, BLP and notability. I would appreciate some of you Smart People looking at and if need be editing my work. Paul, in Saudi ( talk) 11:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
David Attenborough ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Richard Attenborough ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
You have David Attenborough listed as the younger brother of Richard Attenborough. Not so. he is 86, his brother is 79 - Joseph Berlinger - I can't figure out how to edit. You have made the procedure extraordinarily difficult — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.81.134 ( talk) 17:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Discussion. Influential Jew, marriage commentary, RS?. The question is whether or not enough evidence exists supporting Zuckerberg being included as an American Jew as categories or Jewish as ethnicity in the infobox. Some editors invoke BLPCAT. Thoughts? Wikifan Be nice 21:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Putting aside Wikipedia policy for the moment and approaching this as a commonsense matter, the article body does a good job of explaining who Zuckerberg is from a religious/cultural perspective. The infobox and cats would destroy that good work and label him in a misleading fashion. Wikifan believes (I think) that Zuckerberg inherits his Jewish characteristics, whatever they might be, from his parents. I strongly disagree that just because one is born Jewish, one is a Jew. Some characteristics of human beings are genetic. I am unaware of any Jewish gene.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
While I've mostly stayed out of this issue, I have to say, for the record, both Newsweek ("Ashkenazi Jews are one of the most coherent genetic groups that exist") and The New York Times ("The shared genetic elements suggest that members of any Jewish community are related to one another as closely as are fourth or fifth cousins in a large population") and every other scholarly source support Jews being an ethnic group (or a "genetic" group, as Bbb23 says). I also am beginning to view Bbb23 as highly disruptive. Previously, he stated that people shouldn't be categorized as "Jewish" per "BLPcat" because the category does not differentiate between Jewish religion and Jewish ethnicity. Now, his opinion has shifted further towards whichever direction, in that people can't be described as being "ethnically" Jewish either! (because your ethnicity is not inherited from your parents? I hate to break it to you, but your parents are the only ones who transmit your ethnicity to you. There is no other way to become a member of an ethnic group. That's kind of how it works. "Identifying" with this culture or that does not make you a member of an ethnicity, nor does not identifying with it make you a non-member. Hence the term "ethnically Jewish" and not "culturally Jewish", two different things). Now, I don't know if Bbb23 is my fifth cousin or not, but he doesn't seem to understand the issues here; in fact, more and more so with every passing year since his position is more extreme now than it was a year ago. All Hallow's Wraith ( talk) 17:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Erik Spoelstra ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
It wouldn't hurt to get some more eyes on Erik Spoelstra. A recent piece of vandalism was reported by Forbes.com, and if his team loses tonight, things are going to get worse. A similar edit stayed up today for over thirty minutes. The article doesn't even have thirty people watching it yet, so any help would be appreciated. Zagalejo ^^^ 18:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
All looks OK right now. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:42, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Please, can an editor follow the developments in this page, It appears to me that someone is inserting bias material into the page, with no source. I have added "citation needed" for various claims, and tried to complete it by adding referenced material to the site, but much of the material has been removed and replaced by unreferenced material.
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehdi313a ( talk • contribs) 12:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Juan Vargas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Someone removed info that I added that was referenced and accurate:
As a Senator he did not vote in favor of SB 810[3], a legislation that would have supported universal comprehensive healthcare to all Californians, which is part of the California State Democratic Party Platform[4]
I have replaced. Why was it removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.15.2.142 ( talk) 03:27, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Hal Erickson (author) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Is this BLP notable enough for a standalone article? The only bio info I have is minimal from 2005 at google books. Google search is hard to do on him because he is quoted so much. I started a user space page on him:
User:Canoe1967/Hal Erickson (author)--
Canoe1967 (
talk)
15:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Billie Jean King ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article begins with a section on her "personality" and features 6 paragraph long, block quotes. I find this grossly inappropriate and would like to remove all of the quotes. Any thoughts, suggestions, opinions?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Done
Chris Lintott ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Apologies if this is the wrong place to put this; the wikipedia page dealing with me shows an out of date affiliation and job title which is causing problems. I've posted a note on the relevant talk page ( Talk:Chris Lintott) but would appreciate it if someone could make the update or let me know if more information is needed. Thanks Chrislintott ( talk) 13:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Tomislav Nikolić ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The newly elected right-wing president of Serbia. I'm not fan of him (on the contrary, but that's not relevant here). The problem is that article has giant "controversies" section (about 40-50% of the article). Out of the 11 total sections (excluding References and External links) 7 sections are controversies. My main concern is "Accusations of war crimes" section, which is partially referenced to primary sources (press releases actually). There was never any indictment against him for war crimes, so I think this is the case where WP:BLPCRIME should be applied. There are other problematic sections like "University degree" also, but my primary concern is "Accusations of war crimes" section.-- В и к и T 19:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Glad to hear WP:BLPCRIME applies generally, Buku, but I did notice the limiting language that I quoted. Is there another section I have missed? Thanks. Coaster92 ( talk) 04:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Ali Khalid ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
He is of Pakistani decent. The article claimed his father was Pakistani and that his mother was Gilgiti. Gilgit is in Pakistan. Therefore, I must question the need for the info about his mother being from Gilgit relevant, unless Gilgitis specifically see themselves as drastically separate ethnically, which I could not seem to find evidence to support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaltonCastle ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Limited independent notability, imo - sent for discussion to - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Khalid ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - Youreally can 06:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Steve Jones (biologist) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There's an interesting discussion at Talk:Steve Jones (biologist); briefly, Jones is known (as the article title would suggest) as a biologist but recently made some comments about global warming. Another editor wishes to add something like "It is not known what his credentials are to say this" to the article which I think is somewhat inappropriate. I would prefer any criticism of Jones to be reliably sourced and neutrally worded. Other opinions please? -- John ( talk) 10:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Moved from
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
Jim1138 (
talk)
18:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Fang Zhouzi seems to be subject of an edit war and attack by people trying to damage his reputation. Allegations of voyeurism, sexual assault, and plagiarism being added. References are in Chinese and difficult to understand. I have not left any notices of this posting to any editors as I am not sure who should be notified. This article likely needs an expert. Thanks
Jim1138 (
talk)
09:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
NXIVM ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please see User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_106, Section title "Plea", right near the bottom, where JW would have me bring this matter to you. He has, see the talk page of the articles in question and the JW talk page archives, seems to express concern that this is an important and difficult issue in need of the attention of informed BLP editors. What should we do? Let me know if you would like me to repeat this plea again here or whether, as I would hope, this word to the wise is enough. Chrisrus ( talk) 15:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Elizabeth Warren ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm concerned about what I see as BLP violations on Talk:Elizabeth Warren. It may be though that I'm being oversensitive, so I'm seeking outside opinion, Within this section Talk:Elizabeth_Warren#Undue_Weight_and_Coatrack_in_Senate_run_section. we have the use of pejoritive terms that have been used by certian opinion columnists. i.e. "Liawatha". I feel these should be redacted and not repeated unless it's specifically about a suggested inclusion. My opinion has been disputed by a 3rd editor.-- Cube lurker ( talk) 17:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)edited to fix spelling error pointed out by 24dot
I've elected to leave a general reminder as a start, but would welcome some outside administrative opinions. I think this page is likely to be sort of a test case for how we handle high-profile political biographies, and politically motivated editing and commentary, in an election season. Hopefully things will be smoother than in 2008. MastCell Talk 17:06, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Lieawatha has an "e", you know. I can see the logic of either spelling, but the reality is that most columnists are inserting the e (google compare).
I hope that wasn't the spelling error you "fixed"! 66.105.218.38 ( talk) 20:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
This is a Senate campaign, whether you like it or not, the controversies of a campaign are fair game. The sobriquets "Lie-awatha" and "Faux-cahontas" are in extensive use throughout the State, and local radio talk shows have sponsored contests to find the best Elizabeth Warren "Indian" names. They all refer to the the controversy included in the page, are in wide use, and are relevant to the campaign, in the sense that when a stumble becomes so bad that it is a constant source of water-cooler talk, it at some level affects the race. -- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 16:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Political meme I guess the question comes down to whether these have become a/some political meme(s) in a Senate race, in which case they are absolutely valid inclusions. Obviously a casual insult does not warrant inclusion, but a meme does. Memes, to head off the next argument, are seldom kind, but their effectiveness is related to how well they bring attention to an issue. -- 209.6.69.227 ( talk) 16:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Michael Roach ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm very sorry to have to raise this again, but recent news articles about the events surrounding Ian Thorson's death seem to have triggered a new bunch of non-NPOV edits to the Michael Roach wikipedia page. Since one of the people doing these edits has accused me of COI, I would appreciate it if someone here who is actually neutral could look at the last few edits to the article and see what you think. Abhayakara ( talk) 04:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Based on the lack of response above, I used my judgment to edit the article. User:Nomoskedasticity is now engaging in an edit war over on the Michael Roach page and is making accusations of sockpuppetry in addition to his previous accusations of non-NPOV. Some neutral analysis would _really_ be appreciated. Abhayakara ( talk) 05:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
[25] shows a revert of a failed attempt to make the content of a section NPOV - it has the edit summary of "NPOV -- avoiding overemphasis on what Rogers says himself" which I consider a strange position considering what the actual claims ascribed to him are, and what the implicit claims in Wikipedia's voice are. Please look. Collect ( talk) 12:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Britney Spears ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The personal life section keeps getting deleted & put back in her career. It really needs to stay in its own section so readers don't have to read her whole career just to find out what happened in her personal life. Stoopsklan ( talk) 20:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Sheldon Souray ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone please take a look at the article and the recent battle over his marital history? I've run out of reverts. I did start a topic on the Talk page, little good it's done so far. Also, same IP is editing the Angelica Bridges article.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 02:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Mentioning she did not deserve the part for the role of Goddess Parvati is entirely wrong as mentioned... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.227.157 ( talk) 08:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Roger Pearson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) It is rather well documented that Pearson has founded and been active in several antisemitic, neo-nazi, and racialist organizations through his life time - described in various books. An editor feels that mentioning this biases the article against Pearson and removes this sourced information, citing WP:UNDUE. I think some third and fourth opinions could be good - I have reverted the removal but honestly I am not sure about how best to cover this kind of thing. Pearson is a controversial person and has received lots of negative publicity mostly for his political work, his academic work is not comparably well known. But it is true that it not exactly flattering to have this stuff in you BLP, and that it does pose some policy relevant questions. IF anyone can chip n at the talk page I'd be happy. ·ʍaunus· snunɐw· 02:03, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I noticed the Wiki article on the Northern League (United Kingdom) says the organization was neo-nazi and was founded by him. IMO if the information is based on reliable secondary sources, and was not an isolated incident in his life (which it does not seem to be), then it is appropriate in the article. The other editor can focus on providing information on his academic work. Coaster92 ( talk) 05:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I am the subject of the article in question and have made edits to compensate for libelous commissions and omissions as previously published. In making these corrections I have referenced Official Court transcripts that are the authoritative research source on the particular and critical matters footnoted. So far as I know the transcripts are not publicly quoted elsewhere than in my own book entitled Justice in Paradise, McGill-Queen's University Press, Montreal and Kingston, 1999. My affidavit evidence is also reproduced in the book attesting to the fidelity of the quotations to the whole truth upon pain of prosecution for perjury. The transcripts speak for themselves and no opinion from the book is mentioned. As previously presented the article was sufficiently erroneous that a COI check on its author might well be in order just in case he or she has ever been, or might still be connected in some fashion to the indigenous rights industry that is constituted and funded by federal government agencies in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand. Since I acted on behalf of Indian Tribes in bitter opposition to the allegedly usurping federally incorporated or endorsed Indian bands or "First Nations," and since those entities are mortal competitors for the indigenous interest, any such relationship with the industry could be an alternative explanation to paucity of sources and scandalous inadequacy that I have attempted to counterbalance with the most cogent evidence currently available.-- BruceAllanClark ( talk) 15:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
What parts of the article do you think damage your reputation? We have a strict policy here ( Wikipedia:BLP#Presumption_in_favor_of_privacy) regarding the way Wikipedia handles articles involving the biography of a living person. While I can't promise that material will be changed, if you can be clear about what you object to, that would be very helpful in moving forward. Thanks again, Lord Roem ( talk) 22:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Please could you comment on the talk page of the article, this really isn't the correct venue for discussing changes to Bruce Allan Clark (lawyer) Thank you. Theroadislong ( talk) 13:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Jeffrey Docking ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There have been some IP blankings at Jeffrey Docking, removing material about a football firing controversy. here here and at a related article here. As far as I can tell, everything there seems to be compliant with BLP policy, but I'd like some input on that. All of the material there is right out of reliable sources, is cited to death, and the sources are archived. I don't even think the material is all that controverisal, but someone out there disagrees. I just want to head off any issues. The IPs seem to be sourced to the college. -- GrapedApe ( talk) 15:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Randeep Hooda ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Wikipedia page of a person by name Randeep Hooda is written by a person/persons in an obviously biased and opinionated manner. The page is meant for information on the person, and not meant to be an author's biography or personal opinion. Please flag the article as inappropriate. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.194.170.230 ( talk) 00:15, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Herb Caen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Should the subject be called an American or SF based writer in the lede. Please see talk page for discussion. Thank you. -- Mollskman ( talk) 18:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello everone. I am having difficulties keeping this page Badshah Munir Bukhari in keeping with WP:BLP guidelines, particularly their three core content policies: Neutral point of view (NPOV), Verifiability (V), and No original research (NOR). In terms of verifiability, one editor (IP 121.52.147.11) keeps inserting information that contradicts the neutral (third-party) source in the article: a university departmental webpage. For example, the website calls Bukhari "Mr" (in a dept which lists Drs and Professors) and identifies him having master's level quals, not a PhD. Yet "PhD" keeps reurning to the page. On the Talk Page there is also an accusation from another editor that these unhelpful edits are being made by Badshah Munir Bukhari himself. On that I cannot comment. I do not know. Please have a look. Thank you. George Custer's Sabre ( talk) 10:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Christian Settipani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am having difficulty with an edit of a biography of Christian Settipani who has done some research in early medieval history and prosopography. Mr. Settipani is popular in some quarters and some other editors had written the article in a way that attracted a determination that there were problems of neutrality, the reason why he was notable and adequate citation. I added some materials to explain his notability but at first only cited a source (Halfond) who was critical of one of Settipani's publications. Halfond is a minor academic who does not exercise much influence in this field but I felt for the sake of neutrality and relevance it was a good citation. Pmanderson objected that I could not have derived any of the positive statements made regarding Settipani's reception by historical academia based on Halfond's article. I made some objections and explanations but left the section deleted and went about searching for the specific citations necessary to support anything I would later want to add again. Before I had completed this, another editor (with whom I have no connection) apparently found Pmanderson's action capricious or abusive and reinserted the deleted portion. Whatever I felt about that I recognized the deficiency of the original contribution and quickly added about a half dozen citations to the primary researchers in the field and their take on Settipani's work. I put Halfond's review back into context and I think anwswered the few of Pmanderson's objections that were the most meritorious. Then yesterday, Bobrayner objected to the lack of support for some aspect of Mr. Settipani's employment (a completely different section than I am working on and having nothing whatever to do with it) and summarily deleted the corrected section that I had just worked on because apparently he could not see why the other editor had put it back. He clearly had not reviewed the corrective changes. Having in fact already born the burden I was obliged to and made extensive changes, I reinstated the disputed language with a lengthy note on the talk page. Bobrayner deleted again citing again the citation needed designation he had placed on the unrelated entry (which in fact I do not think he has deleted). I have reposted the material and asked nicely again that he raise his objections to the extensive sources some of which I quoted at length and some of which, I think in fact most of which are accessible on line and for which I provided the URLs, and that he leave the material intact until he has explained why citation to the leading academics' in this field comments on the subject of the article are irrelevant. I have gone to considerable length to explain the changes in the appropriate place and would regard further deletion without taking up the sufficiency of the changes to be abusive. Please advise GradyEdwardLoy ( talk) 13:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Charles Harpole ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article appears to be written by the subject. Page contains very few citations; however there is a note at the bottom instructing any reader who needs citations: "it is up to them to do the research to get that". All other references are within the text, such as: "Reference the college catalogues of each university for citation "proof" of these jobs held", although not cited properly and not available. A paragraph, also likely written by the subject, at the bottom of the page questions Wikipedia's citation policy. The subject seems to be under the impression that this is his personal website, as opposed to a qualified source. Mdechris ( talk) 14:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Huge numbers of people who are Mormons who served in any foreign countries for any length of time are now being categorrized as "American expartiates in (country)". This includes people both living and dead in vast profusion (Brigham Young, Jr. was listed for 8 countries!). [27] is typical of this strange set of edits. [28] was the one which led me to this trail. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 16:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
In June, a biography of a living person, Michael Jingozian, was tagged with the following three objections:
--“This biography of a living person needs additional references or sources for verification.” --“It is written like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view.” --“It may have been edited by a contributor who has a close connection with its subject.”
I’ve relied on these objections to rewrite the biography of Mr. Jingozian. My goal is to ensure that the biography meets all of Wikipedia’s standards.
The rewritten biography was posted on Wikipedia in early August; however the same three objections are still listed.
The URL is: Michael Jingozian ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could you kindly let me know if the rewritten biography has been reviewed, and whether the biography requires further editing to satisfy any Wikipedia objections?
Thank you for your assistance.
Alan Lohner
50.53.73.223 ( talk) 17:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Moved from WP:Requests_for_comment/Request_board Coastside ( talk) 18:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Valerie Sinason ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I would like comment on the Sinason biography with a view to deleting it entirely. Right now the bio treats Sinason as a crank.
The problem is Sinason's record of her treatment of people who report a history of satanic ritual abuse. Wikipedia has determined that SRA is a fringe view. As such Sinason's involvement in the issue means that she must be treated as a crank because to do otherwise might appear to validate SRA as not fringe. I don't think it is fair to use Sinason's bio to advance the Wikipedia judgement that SRA is fringe. The entry for SRA does a lengthy enough job of making the fringe argument. The Sinason bio should be deleted. As it stands it is a kind of witchhunt. 86.162.221.34 ( talk) 19:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC) Moved from WP:Requests_for_comment/Request_board Coastside ( talk) 19:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
This link is stated as Tara Palmer-Tomkinson's 'BBC Profile' but it simply leads you to an article (not a profile) that is nearly 10 years old. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaH82 ( talk • contribs) 16:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Nikos Alefantos ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article contains very few sources and potentially defamatory material. This person isn't popular outside of a targeted niche in one country. Article generally misses sources and citations, because there are none to be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnF30 ( talk • contribs) 19:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Luka Magnotta ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Some of the talk page may be against BLP. I put a big bold section at the top that may help. It is a long read. Warning: it deals with a recent murder investigation and is rather graphic in places. I haven't read the article much, but it seems okay.-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 21:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
As Liev's father, I would like to improve some of the information that pertains to me and my relationship with my son and his mother. I would like the phrase "commune" stricken from the description of our home in Canada. We were a nuclear family on a privately owned ten acre property. There is a slimey reference to my lifestyle as corrupted by practices of "free love". Not the case, in fact. Without going into details which might cast aspersions on Liev's mother, we were as a family dealing with issues of serious fear and paranoia. Unfounded charges were made. I'm aware that the New Yorker article did little to explore or diminish the falseness of those charges. When, in flight from a custody case she initiated in Canada, she removed him to New York, I was denied all access to him until his older brother, six years later phoned from New York and offered to arrange a visit if I could get to New York on a weekend when Liev would be in his brother's care. I was desperate to see him; I sold a heifer calf I was raising to keep the meeting. I subsequently, on the salary of a common high school teacher, paid tuition for both of Liev's private school high school years, all three of his undergraduate college years, the year of his training at RADA, and his three years of graduate school at Yale. It would help the record to understand that, unlike any of Liev's New York relatives, I loved theater, was a busy and committed actor at Dartmouth, and later in my twenty wonderful Canadian years helped start a theater department at the local community college and worked to create an actor training program. Also that I was twenty-six at Liev's birth, not twenty-two. I don't believe Liev ever wrestled; I did.
We have managed a somewhat strained relationship since. I admire his talent deeply, love him as well as he allows, and I'm able. I've seen all but three of his New York stage shows. He just paid me a profoundly appreciated visit with Naomi and Sasha and Kai in honor of my seventieth birthday. I'm immensely proud of him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.180.222 ( talk • contribs)
Moved from wp:Requests_for_comment/Request_board (some issues appear to remain open, e.g., use of "commune") Coastside ( talk) 07:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
NLT --- Collapsed |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Subject: False, defamatory and hate mjaterial about me on wikipedia Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 22:26:51 +1030 Please remove the entire page at: Raymond Hoser This material is false, defamatory and incites hatred. Attempts to edit are continually blocked trolls within wikipedia including users Mokele and User:HCA Who have automated settings to revert to lies any pages we try to alter. The webpage also breaches trademarks as does your "snakeman" pages so please remove them as well. As it is not within your ability to publish truth or abide by the laws of trademarks and misleading conduct, please remove the pages forthwith. Furthermore remove the words "Raymond_Hoser" from any and all wikipedia url's including non-English ones. A copy of this e-mail is being sent to my lawyers. Thank you. Snake Man Raymond Hoser Snakebusters - Australia's best reptiles Phones: (Redacted) |
Re: the supposedly biographical entry on Catherine Chatterley
Catherine D Chatterley ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The paragraph dealing with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights is polemical and not biographical. One might say that she has been a public defender of the CMHR but to make (unfounded) allegations about the critics of the CMHR and to accuse them of anti-Semitism is unfair, potentially libellous.
A biographical entry should confine itself to facts, not the opinions of the author. Wikipedia should not be promoting dubious and even mendacious texts disguised as biographical notes.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.142.54 ( talk • contribs)
Vanity piece. Creator is a new editor, persistently removing maintenance templates. 76.248.149.47