![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Clark Aldrich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Suggested or supposed real name is clearly not well known even if it is real - the chat is here /info/en/?search=Talk:Clark_Aldrich#Source
the story taken down is - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clark_Aldrich&diff=617005848&oldid=603837451
writer is using these Internet links
http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html - http://ceoroundtableblog.com/2011/12/frank-wezniak-photovac-member-in-the-news/ - http://www.mocavo.com/Clark-Wezniak-Lisa-Eastwood-Connecticut-Marriage-Record-Index-1959-2007/01780009497083875935 - pp 6-8) - Brown Alumni webzine: http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html
the take down editor has suggested a trolling issue and wrote this - According to documentation here ( https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27077549/Clark%20Aldrich.pdf), Clark Aldrich's birth surname was indeed Aldrich. Further, according to the same genealogy report, he is the 11th great grandson of both Governors John Winthrop and Thomas Dudley. This is consistent with his bio here: http://unschooling-rules.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html#bio At this point, insistence by the troll community at Get Off My Internets of the birth name Wezniak is best characterized as libelous. User:Intrepid French Learner
I do not understand so well the rules here - please assist, comment - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 18:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Augie Wolf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Awolf99 appears to be the biographical subject of Augie Wolf. He appears to take offense at content that I believe accurately summarizes a Los Angeles Times article. He contends that the article had factual inaccuracies. Ordinarily, I would revert with a mention of WP:TRUTH. What consideration should we give to the WP:BLP. According to Talk:Augie_Wolf#Content_removal_discussion, there was some discussion about this bio in Novmeber 2013.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
William Bastone ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A single purpose account is repeatedly adding unsourced negative material to the William Bastone article [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and other articles, where they claim the subject endorses child prostitution. [6] At no point have any sources been added to support these accusations. Edward321 ( talk) 03:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Article semi-protected, dubious usernames blocked.
Gamaliel (
talk)
03:51, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Lindsey Doe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I came across an edit to Lindsey Doe on Huggle where the creator removed the notability tag and on the talk page has declared that it satisfies the BLP policy because she has x number of subscribers on Youtube based on WP:N#ENT. Does 130,000 Youtube subscribers count as notable? -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 04:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Clyde Lewis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A person or persons are continuously and repeatedly altering the Clyde Lewis page by inserting words such as "bizarre" and "farfetched" to describe this person in an attempt to defame his character. I have repeatedly removed the offensive, opinionated material as it detracts from the intended fact-based purpose of wikipedia. People read the articles on wikipedia to learn facts about the subject matter, not to read the opinions being inserted by vindictive persons with an agenda to malign the character of a person referenced in a wikipedia article. However, every time I remove the inappropriate content it is reinserted just a short time later. This has happened over and over again despite my ongoing efforts to keep the inappropriate material out of the article. "Bizarre" and "farfetched" are opinions, not facts, and have no place in a wikipedia article that had previously been 100% fact-based. The wording being inserted into this article is clearly done in a deliberate effort to portray Clyde Lewis as crazy. The article should contain facts, not opinions. If Clyde Lewis is crazy than the facts of the article will make that clear to the reader. Inserting opinions into this long-standing article for the sole purpose of defaming the subject of the article is not appropriate and devalues wikipedia as a whole. If the persons who have been altering the article feel so strongly about Clyde Lewis then they need to find a more appropriate website or other venue to make their opinions known, but wikipedia is not that place. I should not have to edit out the offensive material on a nearly daily basis just to keep the article objective and unbiased. This has gotten absurd and needs to come to an end.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Subglobal ( talk • contribs)
User:Localemediamonitor is writing stuff like this - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - rubbish verification imo Mosfetfaser ( talk) 20:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I have had to take down a replacement of the disputed content added without any chat at all by User: Bearian https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=prev&oldid=618033730 - sorry to see such an experienced wiki writer as User: Bearian edit warring this poorly sourced disputed story back into the wiki - Mosfetfaser ( talk)
there is some warring going on to rep[lace this disputed content - User:/Roberticus /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Roberticus has turned up to replace the disputed stony - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
" User:Localemediamonitor is attempting to war the story into the article again - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=618037931&oldid=618036813 - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
again to go to the story write - WP:PRIMARY and a you tube link that is removed because of copyright violation - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced blp:Primary and a you tube link - - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Mosfetfaser is now engaging in personal attacks against Bearian [7] and The Magnificent Clean-keeper [8] [9] Edward321 ( talk) 13:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Benjamin Netanyahu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Benjamin Netanyahu is not the first Israeli prime minister born in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin was born in Israel and was prime minister before Netanyahu.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpmonch ( talk • contribs)
Clark Aldrich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Suggested or supposed real name is clearly not well known even if it is real - the chat is here /info/en/?search=Talk:Clark_Aldrich#Source
the story taken down is - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clark_Aldrich&diff=617005848&oldid=603837451
writer is using these Internet links
http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html - http://ceoroundtableblog.com/2011/12/frank-wezniak-photovac-member-in-the-news/ - http://www.mocavo.com/Clark-Wezniak-Lisa-Eastwood-Connecticut-Marriage-Record-Index-1959-2007/01780009497083875935 - pp 6-8) - Brown Alumni webzine: http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html
the take down editor has suggested a trolling issue and wrote this - According to documentation here ( https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27077549/Clark%20Aldrich.pdf), Clark Aldrich's birth surname was indeed Aldrich. Further, according to the same genealogy report, he is the 11th great grandson of both Governors John Winthrop and Thomas Dudley. This is consistent with his bio here: http://unschooling-rules.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html#bio At this point, insistence by the troll community at Get Off My Internets of the birth name Wezniak is best characterized as libelous. User:Intrepid French Learner
I do not understand so well the rules here - please assist, comment - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 18:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Augie Wolf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Awolf99 appears to be the biographical subject of Augie Wolf. He appears to take offense at content that I believe accurately summarizes a Los Angeles Times article. He contends that the article had factual inaccuracies. Ordinarily, I would revert with a mention of WP:TRUTH. What consideration should we give to the WP:BLP. According to Talk:Augie_Wolf#Content_removal_discussion, there was some discussion about this bio in Novmeber 2013.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
William Bastone ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A single purpose account is repeatedly adding unsourced negative material to the William Bastone article [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] and other articles, where they claim the subject endorses child prostitution. [15] At no point have any sources been added to support these accusations. Edward321 ( talk) 03:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Article semi-protected, dubious usernames blocked.
Gamaliel (
talk)
03:51, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Lindsey Doe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I came across an edit to Lindsey Doe on Huggle where the creator removed the notability tag and on the talk page has declared that it satisfies the BLP policy because she has x number of subscribers on Youtube based on WP:N#ENT. Does 130,000 Youtube subscribers count as notable? -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 04:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Clyde Lewis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A person or persons are continuously and repeatedly altering the Clyde Lewis page by inserting words such as "bizarre" and "farfetched" to describe this person in an attempt to defame his character. I have repeatedly removed the offensive, opinionated material as it detracts from the intended fact-based purpose of wikipedia. People read the articles on wikipedia to learn facts about the subject matter, not to read the opinions being inserted by vindictive persons with an agenda to malign the character of a person referenced in a wikipedia article. However, every time I remove the inappropriate content it is reinserted just a short time later. This has happened over and over again despite my ongoing efforts to keep the inappropriate material out of the article. "Bizarre" and "farfetched" are opinions, not facts, and have no place in a wikipedia article that had previously been 100% fact-based. The wording being inserted into this article is clearly done in a deliberate effort to portray Clyde Lewis as crazy. The article should contain facts, not opinions. If Clyde Lewis is crazy than the facts of the article will make that clear to the reader. Inserting opinions into this long-standing article for the sole purpose of defaming the subject of the article is not appropriate and devalues wikipedia as a whole. If the persons who have been altering the article feel so strongly about Clyde Lewis then they need to find a more appropriate website or other venue to make their opinions known, but wikipedia is not that place. I should not have to edit out the offensive material on a nearly daily basis just to keep the article objective and unbiased. This has gotten absurd and needs to come to an end.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Subglobal ( talk • contribs)
User:Localemediamonitor is writing stuff like this - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - rubbish verification imo Mosfetfaser ( talk) 20:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I have had to take down a replacement of the disputed content added without any chat at all by User: Bearian https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=prev&oldid=618033730 - sorry to see such an experienced wiki writer as User: Bearian edit warring this poorly sourced disputed story back into the wiki - Mosfetfaser ( talk)
there is some warring going on to rep[lace this disputed content - User:/Roberticus /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Roberticus has turned up to replace the disputed stony - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
" User:Localemediamonitor is attempting to war the story into the article again - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=618037931&oldid=618036813 - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
again to go to the story write - WP:PRIMARY and a you tube link that is removed because of copyright violation - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced blp:Primary and a you tube link - - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Mosfetfaser is now engaging in personal attacks against Bearian [16] and The Magnificent Clean-keeper [17] [18] Edward321 ( talk) 13:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Benjamin Netanyahu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Benjamin Netanyahu is not the first Israeli prime minister born in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin was born in Israel and was prime minister before Netanyahu.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpmonch ( talk • contribs)
Ankit Mohan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have created this wiki page for A popular Hindi Television Actor, It is not poorly sourced, when I add sources/references they also get deleted. Why is Wikipedia behaving this way?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.236.134.199 ( talk • contribs)
Roger Goodman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
RED SLASH and Breawycker keep changing entry to include libelous material. RED SLASH has been contacted twice and refused to remove. Please see copy received earlier this evening from KOMO 4 News--showing that it is recognized that an error was made. They have corrected the libelous statement accordingly, therefore, any changes to reflect otherwise are considered intentional. I will be sending a copy of this message to both wiki editors. THANKS.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liv Grohn ( talk • contribs)
Tepai Moeroa ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
played his junior rugby league at Colyton Colts JRLFC from under 6 to under 10 before going to St Clair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.213.211 ( talk) 06:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
There is a website England & Wales Births 1837-2006 (which I refer to as "Find my past") where one can look up certain information about births registered in England and Wales.
Some people - including Trillionstarz ( talk · contribs) and 92.8.20.63 ( talk) - are using this website to give references for full names, full dates of birth, and place of birth. Unfortunately, none of those is given with 100% accuracy. Full names may be shortened, by abbreviating all the given names except the first; dates of birth are given no more accurately than a particular quarter of the year; and the place that is shown in the column headed "District" is not the actual place of birth, but the place where the birth was registered.
I have verified this by checking out around thirty members of my own extended family - only in about 75% of the cases does the district tally with the known place of birth. Two of my cousins, for example, who were born in Blackburn, have the district shown as Clitheroe, a town a few miles to the north: my uncle worked in Clitheroe at the time, and commuted there from Blackburn - he most probably found it easier to get to the Clitheroe registry office rather than the Blackburn one within office hours. Some of the other information has errors - when I looked up my own entry, it's not just truncated my second given name (the one by which I am usually known) to a single letter, but it's also got my mother's last name wrong - it's just a typo on one letter, but this shows that errors exist on that site. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 11:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Not living people, but I figured since this was where all the people who understood biography policies are, it was the best place for a good-faith notice of doing something novel. Dictionary of New Zealand Biography is the national biography of New Zealand. More than a decade ago there was a concerted effort to balance it for race, gender and class. Some of these people left few if any secondary sources as to their lives, resulting in encyclopaedia articles built entirely from primary sources. Some time ago I did a major push to get DNZB articles into wikipedia. Some of these balancing people are pretty borderline notability and quite a few got nominated at AfD. The overwhelming majority passed. There are a few problematic ones. In a (novel?) solution to this problem I've created a new section in the DNZB and am redirecting these very problematic ones to subsections there, but using persondata and cats on the redirect. See Barbara Weldon and Jessie Finnie. I'd appreciate feedback on this approach. Stuartyeates ( talk) 20:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
It's interesting that they have those entries, and I think it's better not to lose them, but a Wikipedia article probably shouldn't have a sentence directly explaining and referencing Wikipedia rules. The article is about the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, not Wikipedia. I also think it's OR to say that these are somehow "added", "extra", or "less-real" biographies. I think the assumption should be that the editors of the project added all bios they thought worth adding of people they thought worthy of study and note, and not an assumption that they added things they didn't fully believe in. I don't like the second-guessing of a reliable source with the idea that someone with no grounding in New Zealand history would write the reliable source differently. I think that these people were added to the original source text helps define them as noted, and should support inclusion of them somewhere.
There are masses of biographies that were taken from things like the Catholic Encyclopedia and many others in
Category:Wikipedia sources. Most of these articles have few or no secondary sources beyond inclusion in the reference work, if that reference is generally seen as a reliable source. Basically these people were the subject of scholarly study, and according to the source had some notability in their lifetimes: And, from about 1870, the West Coast Times court reporters became rather fond of publishing items about Barbara Weldon 'the notorious'.
__ E L A Q U E A T E
01:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Chris Alexander (editor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm coming here because of information on the page Chris Alexander (editor) and a discussion on the talk page that has grown somewhat heated. The article has a little history behind it and some of it can be seen at the AfD for the page. Knowing the history is somewhat important here, as Alexander himself is participating in the talk page. When the article was up for deletion, Alexander was concerned that the article was submitted to AfD out of malice. On July 16th a controversy section was added to the article that discussed a piece written for Fangoria by "Ben Cortman". (For the sake of diplomacy I'm not going to refer to it as either a review or an article, due to the nature of the discussion on the talk page.) The section stated that Alexander wrote the piece as a review with the intention to promote the film without stating that he was writing under a pseudonym. It was sourced via a site that Wikipedia would not consider to be a RS. I re-wrote the section since I felt that it wasn't really enough to warrant a separate section and I used a Bloody Disgusting article to back up the re-written information. It was the only RS I could really find that discussed the piece. This concerned me and I was also somewhat worried that it was a bit WP:UNDUE weight in Alexander's article, and voiced on a talk page that it would probably have been better in an overall controversy section on the Fangoria page if we could find enough information for a controversy section, as just about every major magazine has them. Alexander has come on to the article's talk page and argued that the piece was not supposed to be a review and that it was supposed to be a joke article. He also stated that the information in the BD article (which is an interview) was incorrect. The information has been removed and replaced several times. User:NinjaRobotPirate has been somewhat more involved with the discussion in the last few days since I went on vacation and was unable to get onto Wikipedia until today.
The question here is basically whether the information should be kept or removed. Some discussion will likely be necessary on the article's talk page, as that's where most of the discussion took place. I can see both side's argument, as I can see where it'd be interesting to add to Wikipedia and we do have the one source, but I can also see the argument that we should remove the information because we only have the one source. I do see BD as a RS but it's still only one source. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 00:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
High journalistic standards. The standards of one person. An ex-FANGORIA blogger on an obsessive revenge trip against the editor who he believes wronged him.
Like this latest, thoughtful, "feature": http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/fangoria-musick-presents-the-music-of-chris-alexander-editor-of-fangoria/
Or this classic: http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/charles-band-launches-delerium-magazine-chris-alexander-announced-as-eic/
Nope. I see nothing personal there. Just high-quality journalistic standards. Inspiring!
And now, Mr. Pace has managed to find work as a freelancer with MY ex-employer and closest competitor, Rue Morgue:
http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/rue-morgue-magazine-completes-transparency-survey/
Oh, the scandal!
I'll say my own 2 cents: Dave Pace grooves on scandal. By his own admission. And if he can't find any, he'll create some that suits his agenda. I've said before, after wasting SO much time arguing with this ex-blogger-o-mine on his awesome blog, that I would never address him again in a public forum because it is exactly what he wants and frankly, I think feelings were hurt on both sides. Not interested such things. And, as I've said, if the Wiki brain-trusts deem him and the erroneous Bloody Disgusting interview quote that stemmed from his blog, a valuable addition to my bio that they have created and maintain, I won't waste another word here. As Pace has said earlier here, Wiki is not my Twitter feed and I cannot control its contents.
But regardless of the outcome, I'm fully expecting and look forward the next Pace blog news item, in which he painstakingly details his triumphant battle with me on the back pages of Wikipedia, complete with screen grabs and IP address reveals. He'll share that link on his Facebook page. He'll share that link on a few horror message board forums. He'll say I'm a terrible, awful person and get a few high-fives from his fans. He'll sleep well.
High journalistic standards indeed!
-Chris Alexander — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.61.206 ( talk) 21:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
You confuse bullying with your own "truths", Dave. All I have done here is re-link to your own blog entries. You have a pattern of attack, spelled out over an entire year on your blog, literally right up until 2 days ago, it seems with that confusing "news" item about my new record label. All to perpetuate more fabricated scandal and position yourself as, what? Morally righteous? Some kind of crusader? 90% of your content is about FANGORIA, the only place that ever published you!It's mind-blowing and really, really strange. You came to Wikipedia to attach yourself to my personal bio, but you're a bit off-base if you think I'm not going to be explicitly clear about who you are, your past, your patterns and your motives, with the staff of Wikipedia.
And again, we both know this entire exchange will end up on yet another axe-grinding blog, a twitter post, a Facebook blast, a forum bell-ringing. Another tired public cry/challenge for me to "lawyer up". It's what you do. It's all you do. I'll NEVER try to silence you. I could care less what games you play with yourself on your blog. But, if pressed publicly, I WILL always be crystal clear about who you are in relation to me and to FANGORIA.
Good luck with Rue Morgue. Hope that works out for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.61.206 ( talk) 03:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Greg Mortenson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Somaly Mam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is absolutely no connection between these two people, but an editor keeps adding each of them to a "see also" section for the other in an attempt to tar them with the same brush. It has been admitted on talk that doing this in the text of the articles would violate the coatrack policy, but it is still being done as a See Also. Jonathunder ( talk) 19:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani contains a section called "Supporting Terrorism" which contains very presumptuous material, and offers little neutrality. It needs to be reviewed very carefully to form a less biased approach to the issue and offer a fairer characterization of the issue. Labeling multiple political groups as "terrorist organizations" is not helpful either, and it should not be so blatantly biased on a Wikipedia page. Such groups have their pros and cons which is for the reader to decide on their own respective time; we don't need to turn such controversial topics into 'facts' when there are many differing opinions on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.239.157 ( talk) 02:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Roy Stuart (photographer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Roy Stuart photographer page is often vandalized. The vandal consistently posts incorrect birthrates in order to make him appear to be older, posts other defamatory false information. The page needs to be protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carldecanada ( talk • contribs)
Thane Rosenbaum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The issue here concerns Rosenbaum's recent WSJ article. Another editor added the paragraph a few days ago. "Roozee" deleted it and I've twice restored it. My explanation (from the Talk page): "My rationale for doing so was that this is a writing of the subject's that has generated controversy and attention. Indeed, as someone who closely follows the Israel/Palestinian conflict, I was unaware of who he was until he wrote the column in question. I did soften the language as the editing record shows. The contention of Roozee ... seems to be that the article is either insignificant given the volume of the subject's output and/or that the article has been misinterpreted. I think I've countered the former claim; for the latter claim, rather than deleting the reference, I think it'd be better to further massage the reference to assure NPOV."
Here's a diff page
Aemathisphd ( talk) 01:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Dick Cheney ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Donald Trump ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Have an edit warrior insisting that are "associated with the Tea Party Movement" based in one case on a speech given by Trump in front of a group which had some Tea Party members, as well as many non-members, and in the other case by Cheney saying the TPM was a "positive" for the Republican Party. No sources have been given making any greater links than those, which are prima facie insufficient for the contentious claim that they "support the Tea {Party" or are "associated with the Tea Party". Appropriate requests for a self-revert and pointers to WP:EW, WP:RS and WP:BLP have been given repeatedly. I am en vacance and would like someone to keep an eye on those BLPs please. Collect ( talk) 17:42, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The sources are (later ones were added by one editor but do not, IMO, strengthen his claims) :
As far as I can tell the sources do establish that he supports some specific ideals of the "tea party" and that he spoke before an audience which included members of the "tea party", and that in his Presidential campaign he spoke before at least one Tea Party group, as well as libertarians and others not associated with the "tea party" but is quite insufficient to say he is specifically a "person associated with the Tea Party movement" per se. Collect ( talk) 15:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Max Bennett (actor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is an unbalanced article which has been repeatedly edited by the PR for the actor. It continually is edited to embellish the actor's CV by multiple anonymous sources. It takes film roles which constitute nothing but 'extra' work and pretends that these are substantial speaking roles. The article has been consistently abused to enhance the largely unknown actor's profile.
Wikipedia should consider deleting this article. There is no sense in having such an embellished CV online for a unknown theatre actor when several more established actors have very little written about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fightingliars ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Joseph A. Kéchichian ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Thank you for keeping a page on me but there are a few blatant errors in it and I am not sure where the author/s fished them.
What is correct is the intro: Joseph A. Kéchichian is an American scholar of Armenian descent, a renowned[1] historian and political scientist specializing on the Persian Gulf region, focusing in the domestic and regional concerns of Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. He [was] an Adjunct Professor of U.S.-Middle East Relations at UCLA and Pepperdine University, a senior researcher at the RAND Corporation in California , and is now a Senior Fellow at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The next sentence is pure fabrication as I never attended Vanderbilt University, Duke University, or Georgetown University. Instead, I earned my PhD from the University of Virginia in 1985 [Department of Government and Foreign affairs]. Let me know if you need details about BA and MA and I will gladly provide them.
While the list of my books are accurate, you may want to update them:
The Al Sa‘ud Consigliere: Shaykh Youssef Yassin of Sa‘udi Arabia [forthcoming]
‘Iffat Al Thunayan: An Arabian Queen, London: Sussex Academic Press, 2015.
Legal and Political Reforms in Saudi Arabia, London and New York: Routledge, November 2012 (January 2013 for the paperback edition).
Power and Succession in Arab Monarchies, Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008 [translated into Arabic as Al-Sultah wa-Ta‘aqub al-Hukm fil-Mamalikah al-‘Arabiyyah, 2 volumes, Beirut and London: Riad El-Rayyes Books, 2012].
Faysal: Saudi Arabia’s King for All Seasons, Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida, 2008 [translated into Arabic as Faysal: Al-Malik wal-Dawlah, Beirut: Dar al-‘Arabiyyah lil-Mawsu‘at, 2012].
Extremism & Opposition Movements on the Arabian Peninsula, New Delhi: Observer Research Foundation, 2006.
Political Participation and Stability in the Sultanate of Oman, Dubai: Gulf Research Center, 2005 [translated into Arabic as Al-Musharakah al-Siyasiyyah wal-Istikrar fi Sultanat ‘Uman, Dubai: Gulf Research Center, 2005].
The Just Prince: A Manual of Leadership (with R. Hrair Dekmejian), London: Saqi Books, 2003 [translated into Turkish as Adil Hükümdar, Istanbul: Kirmizi Kedi Yayenevi, 2009].
Succession in Saudi Arabia, [New York: Palgrave (2001) [translated into Arabic as Al-Khilafah fil-‘Arabiyyah al-Su‘udiyyah, Beirut and London: Dar Al Saqi, 2003].
Iran, Iraq, and the Arab Gulf States, editor, New York: Palgrave, 2001.
A Century in Thirty Years: Shaykh Zayed and the United Arab Emirates, editor, Washington, D.C.: The Middle East Policy Council, 2000.
Oman and the World: The Emergence of an Independent Foreign Policy, Santa Monica: RAND, 1995.
Political Dynamics and Security in the Arabian Peninsula through the 1990s, MR-167- AF/A, Santa Monica: RAND, 1993.
A simple Amazon search or a Google search would have provided these details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.126.129.76 ( talk) 16:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Tim McKnight ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.147.56.4 ( talk) 02:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Dan Sebring ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Dan Sebring article does not show the notability of the subject. In addition, some of the material is copy/pasted from a source, one of the "sources" is Sebring's Facebook page, among other issues. The anonymous editors 107.209.244.18 and 69.131.98.54 have only edited on this article, specifically replacing poorly sourced material that has been removed by other Wikipedia member editors. Please let me know if there is some other action I should take aside from posting here (I am somewhat new at Wikipedia). Thanks! Seen a Mike ( talk) 16:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Yank Barry ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Yank Barry lawsuit, now dismissed/withdrawn, is mentioned in the article Yank Barry#Court cases. When it was first brought up Talk:Yank Barry#Lawsuit, there were BLP objections, and they were ignored, and I brought it up again (under an erroneous section title) Talk:Yank Barry#Lawsuit against WMF in the article?. I find the discussion has been pretty lame, sometimes utterly ridiculous. So far as I can tell, its mention in the article is a clearcut violation of WP:PUBLICFIGURE (one third-party reference only) and WP:BLPPRIMARY (not cited in the article, but part of the talk page "proof" that this is supposed to be "significant", and later, to justify providing "balance" regarding the closure of the lawsuit, so far). Some of the posters explicitly stated that its presence makes sense in light of YB's pattern of behavior regarding filing silly lawsuits in general, as if that were relevant. One extremely experienced editor stated point-blank that since lawsuits typically involve lots of money, any lawsuit is of course significant. Choor monster ( talk) 15:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Maria Vacratsis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Since I put in the article she voiced the Queen_Metallia in the English dub of Sailor Moon; though many people don't know her for anime role very well. Should there a be reference to that statement? Is it a policy of Wikipedia to have a Citation_needed? Venustar84 ( talk) 19:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Ira Casson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The newly created BLP Ira Casson appears to exist solely to present the controversial aspects of the subject. There is nothing positive in the article. Gnome de plume ( talk) 12:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you editors for changing this article. You editors have convinced me to agree with what you were saying. His research was notable, but it would be better to have more biographical content to make an article on him. Making an article on the committee itself would be much better. Robert4565 ( talk) 16:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC) (the creator of the original article)
I didn't intend to give this guy a bad reputation, I was just just trying to add notable research to an encyclopedia. Robert4565 ( talk) 16:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Flávio Kenup ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone help with a source check to see whether "a.k.a. Viola Kenup" is legimate unsourced comment or not. Thanks. In ictu oculi ( talk) 10:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Nico Rosberg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An IP has been adding their own commentary at Nico Rosberg despite being told not to do so on multiple occasions. I've reverted three times and I'm unsure on what to do next. Can someone take a look? Thanks. NQ talk 16:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Curt Clawson (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)- I wanted to get some uninvolved input on this discussion. This new congressman has been in office for about a month. Last week, he made a public speaking faux pas in which he mistakenly thought 2 US govt. employees appearing at a committee were from India rather than Indian-American. There is no dispute that the incident took place. What is being disputed is the merit of including it.
I contend this is textbook
WP:RECENTISM, nothing more than a minor incident that got some coverage during the news cycle and quickly drops to obscurity. Including it is giving it UNDUE weight. Arguments for inclusion have been:
This user was unhappy that three other editors disagreed on having that material deleted, so he posted here to seek additional input. The discussion is at Talk:Curt Clawson - Cwobeel (talk) 16:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
John Walsh (U.S. politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The NY Times recently reported that they had uncovered what they allege is evidence that Senator Walsh plagiarized up to 2/3 of his 2007 master's thesis at the U.S. Army War College . The Times' allegations, Senator Walsh's responses (claiming variously that he didn't think he'd done anything wrong, that it was or was not explained by PTSD, and/or that it was unintentional) and news that the War College is investigating have been widely and extensively covered by numerous reliable sources including CBS News, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Fox News and others.
Currently any mention of this is buried in 4 3 bland sentences (after Montanabw
just reverted one of them) in a section titled
2014 election near the very end of article. When
Presbyterian1
tried to move it into an earlier section on education,
Montanabw
reverted with the edit remark, "Drop the effing stick, Presbyterian1 before we have you blocked."
In discussion on the talk page at Talk:John Walsh (U.S. politician)#Plagiarism allegation, Montanabw opposes additional coverage arguing WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENTISM and that we should wait until the War College makes a decision. Wehwalt also opposes, arguing WP:BLP. Billmckern argues that the coverage should be one place but does not appear to oppose a more in-depth treatment.
It appears to me WP:UNDUE does not apply insofar as this is certainly not about a minority or "fringe" theory, nor does WP:RECENTISM apply insofar as this is not a story of "flimsy, transient merits". And while this is indeed a WP:BLP, Senator Walsh is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE, meaning that "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it."
My concern is with what appears to be a case of whitewashing by editors who may/may not be completely WP:NPOV and whose behavior may be overly and inappropriately protective of the subject. May I request additional opinions, please? Msnicki ( talk) 02:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
(od) At this point, it is well past "allegation" as the use of unattributed material is freely admitted by that Senator. It belongs in two places - under his education and under his career, as it is intrinsically directly applicable to each for different reasons. (The first reason being directly related to his academic history, the second for the possible loss of rank in the Army, being separate issues) The kidnapping of verbiage for at least 1/4 of his entire thesis is well documented at this point - vide [19] and [20] which has The Army War College, in Pennsylvania, said it has found preliminary evidence of plagiarism and asked a review board to investigate. The school may revoke Walsh's degree if it finds he intentionally presented the work of others as his own. which clearly states it is past the "allegation" stage. None of these sources appears t have any partisan bias against Walsh. A single mention that the problem exists should be as brief as possible in the lead primarily because readers will expect to find it noted in at least five words there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collect ( talk • contribs)
Okay, it's done. Feel free to complain, but I think I did this correctly and fairly. Msnicki ( talk) 04:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Nick Burdi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The wiki biography for nick has been trolled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.218.2 ( talk) 13:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Christopher Mtikila ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I do not know if this article meets notability, but it is a highly critical, unsourced article. My first reaction was to nominate it for deletion, but I would like to hear any responses first. I know nothing about the subject, and came to the article after seeing him interviewed in a pbs documentary. TFD ( talk) 01:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Dylan Penn ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could some of the experts here please assist the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Dylan_Penn on writing a BLP-compliant DYK hook for the main page?-- 184.147.144.166 ( talk) 10:55, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Rich Constable ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could BLPN regulars please take a look at the Rich Constable article - it has been raised at the help desk by an IP who suggests that it is being edited in an unduly negative manner, [22] and from a quick look, I'm inclined to agree that there may be problems. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 03:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
User: Djflem is obsessed with posting negative POV about the BLP. Every day he edits this page by providing articles and information to bolster Mayor Dawn Zimmer's unproven and uncharged allegation of extortion. Djflem also gave serious treatment to matters that are marginally relevant to Constable for the sole purpose of making him look bad (See HGI and COAH discussion). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:1506:76ED:2159:80B4:EA3D:F423 ( talk) 14:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Michael French ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
According to this article, French doesn't talk to tabloids, like London Evening Standard and The Mirror. As for the bio information, I don't think sources are trustworthy. But what can I do? -- George Ho ( talk) 18:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Dave Horne ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
written by Dave Horne. This is an autobiography — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.2.33 ( talk) 06:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Aize Obayan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article appears un-encyclopedic, promotional with notice of WP:COI policy violation connected with the article creator. I proposed the article for deletion but darreg ( talk · contribs) who was the article creator reverted the edit and even clean-up all maintainance tags on the article. Wikicology ( talk) 17:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Elizabeth Hollingworth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Elizabeth Hollingworth is an Australian judge who issued a 'super injunction' against (as I understand it) the publishing of allegations related to a claims made by Gillian Bird. The injunction was leaked by wikileaks and uploaded to commons. An editor linked to the commons copy from Elizabeth Hollingworth's article. The whole thing is a BLP nightmare that's likely to blow up if/when details get published in the local press. Even if the current coverage is appropriate, extra eyes would be appreciated for that eventuality. Stuartyeates ( talk) 22:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Bennett Ratliff ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The edits by Anomalocaridid include information that is generated by sources with a documented history of political attacks, misleading information, and a clear political agenda for the scores, reports and opinions that are produced. The particular groups cited vigorously supported the opponent of Bennett Ratliff in the last election with lies, innuendo, and misleading information and thus cannot be considered as impartial, unbiased sources that should be included in the BLP page. Mr. Ratliff would like to protect his reputation from false and misleading information about his service to the State of Texas.
Michael J. Meade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
a search of the Huffington post reveals mentions of Michael Meade by other authors but no articles authored by Michael Meade. To the best of my ability I cannot find a single article written by Meade on the Huffington post site let alone frequent contributions.
Abhay Kumar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am reporting the article Abhay K for notability. He is just a diplomat, with some minimal work, just like any other diplomat of any other country. This is a very well constructed Wikipedia article, possibly written by Abhay K himself, but it certainly does not merit inclusion. If this merits conclusion, every public servant in every country should be on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.73.190.194 ( talk) 04:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Bob Isherwood ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I recently went through and added citations and edited the article for Bob Isherwood and was hoping this would get rid of the warning header at the top about needing citations (which is several years old and no longer relevant). I know this may not be the place to post this but I'm curious as to how I would go about getting rid of that header now that the article is properly cited and the header no longer applies.
Thanks! JLarson15 ( talk) 05:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much,
Regarding the "reads like a resume" tag (which is also over 3 years old), it doesn't look like that applies anymore either with updated sources and information, and the more editorial aspects taken out. Is it possible to get that tag removed as well?
Thanks again JLarson15 ( talk) 20:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Scott Woods ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The official website does not lead to Scott Woods' website. It leads to http://www.blackair.org/ which is now a commercial site on tax preparation. I cannot find the official website for Scott Woods' poetry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.237.64.89 ( talk) 10:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Done I've removed the flaky EL and replaced it with the official web site. I've also added 4 cites and revised the article. Its now up to WP standards.-- —
Keithbob •
Talk •
19:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Ralph Drollinger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article needs some careful attention. In May, I fully-protected it for 2 weeks [32] in response [33] to a RFPP request [34] by User:Demiurge1000.
Today I had a rather odd request on my talk [35] from User:Accuracymattersman, asking me to block an editor who was allegedly to have "a vendetta" against the subject.
A little investigation shows that there is an long term edit war on this page, so I have fully protected it indefinitely. [36] (I initially protected it for 2 months, [37] but decided that this was inadequate)
The subject is a former pro basketball player, who later became involved with a Christian group called Capitol Ministries. This relationship involved a dispute and litigation, and the edit war relates to that dispute.
The two editors involved in the current edit war are both single-purpose accounts:
The article was previously edited extensively by another apparent SPA AccuracyInPosting ( talk · contribs).
The situation has previously been discussed on the article's talk page, where admin Zagalejo and Orangemike both noted the relevance of WP:BLPPRIMARY#Misuse_of_primary_sources.
The backlinks show that this article has been discussed at ANI December 2012, and here at WP:BLP/N on multiple occasions: November 2010, April 2011, October 2012. It has been mentioned at WP:COIN in November 2010, while Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/RK_Drollinger/Archive is a very busy page.
All three usernames, and their WP:SPA histories, along with their persistent use of primary sources related to a current legal dispute, make me think of WP:THETRUTH.
I do not have the time to review all of the sources in detail, so as an initial step I have removed [38] nearly all of the section relating to Capitol Ministries. There may be some material which should be reinstated, but I think that it is better for a BLP to under-report a particular topic than to retain contested info derived from primary sources.
The usual practice with page protection is for the protecting admin simply to protect the latest version. Having taken the unusual step of following protection with the removal of content, I will leave a note at WP:AN inviting other admins to review my actions and revert them as they see fit. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:21, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Marek Dochnal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek_Dochnal) presents false informations about the person: - all press links talking about Dochnal trials and allegations have been repeatedly removed (14 links to press publications concerning Dochnal trial are missing, 2 irrelevant links are put instead and one of them is Dochnal website), - the article contains spurious suggestion that Dochnal trial had political background while Dochnal has been validly sentenced for bribery, which is well documented in multiple press publications. The latest (27.07.2014) news regards court order of imprisonment of Dochnal, issued by District Court of Warsaw City, on 27 of July ( http://niezalezna.pl/57763-dochnal-bedzie-siedzial-sad-wydal-nakaz-doprowadzenia-przestepcy-za-kratki), - the article contains spurious suggestion that Dochnal case is similar to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Khodorkovsky case while Dochnal guilt was proven and announced in valid court sentence in 2013. - the article suggests that European Court has spoken up for Dochnal innocence ("In September 2012 Marek Dochnal won a long awaited case against Poland in The European Court Of Human Rights in Strasbourg") which is deliberate manipulation.
This article should be tagged to warn readers of spurious informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.243.164.159 ( talk) 00:43, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Can the watchers here please opine on the weight of the controversy and criticism sections of this article? To be certain, His views and columns have agitated quite a few, but that is no cause for this article to be slanted, especially towards more recent events of the past decade. I've noticed this sort of "creep" in articles of all stripes. Might some consolidation be in order? Two kinds of pork ( talk) 01:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Jacqueline Fernandez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There's been ongoing disputes about the subject of the articles date of birth. [ [39]] had dates of birth that was a combination of sources. Two sources gave a month and a day but no year, one of which was a twitter source, the third was a source with just a year. I removed them because to my view it's original research we can not take the sources add them together and get a full DOB as this qualifies as WP:OR. One editor has disagreed with my assessment of the sources and requirement. It's been discussion and no edit wars so no issues with User:Bollyjeff I thought this just might be a good way for a BLP consensus for DOB as this issue has been onging for more then a year by the talkpage. Dear lord why are Bollywood articles DOB BLP info crazy? Lol thanks folks. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 03:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Gossip mag? Okay here are two of the biggest newspapers in India, The Times of India [46] and Hindustan Times [47] recently saying the same thing. Your friend Mr red pen is known to be found of removing content and fighting consensus rather than contributing to the project in a meaningful manner. I think this is pretty much settled with the agreement of the un-involved third parties above. BollyJeff | talk 22:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Is there any genuine dispute about this woman's date of birth? I fully understand the theoretical points being made here, but we have articles with unsourced negative statements and even falsehoods that need attention, not to mention articles that could use general improvement and upgrading, so can we limit the arguing about things that are of peripheral concern? Newyorkbrad ( talk) 01:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Alan Guth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone take a quick look and tell me if talk page edits like this and this, describing the subject of the page as a "fraud," requires intervention? I'm not conversant with the latest BLP rules and practices and I am in disputes with the editor in question on other fronts (original research, civility, editing and discussion practices, etc), so I think I'm the wrong person to even try to make the call. Thanks for taking a look.. -- SCZenz ( talk) 07:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Ashok Chauhan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm in a content dispute over this BLP article with several IP's. The section "Controversies" contains claims about arrest warrants against the subject. The claims are supported by an article by Tim Sullivan ( AP) from 2007, which was adapted/reprinted by other newspaper outlets, also cited in our article. However, a critical article by Mint (newspaper) has an update stating that "A Frankfurt court has also ruled that there are no crimincal proceedings against Chauhan and that the arrest warrant issued has been revoked." From what I have learned during my previous research, the business with education in India is a very dirty business, but I have a question: Is it appropriate to associate a living person in an encyclopedic article with arrest warrants that have been revoked? The last revert at least mentions that "the charges have been later cancelled" (my earlier addition/update), which is better but I have to ask for an independent opinion. My opponents cite WP:PUBLICFIGURE as an argument, and it might be a valid argument. What do you think about that? -- Vejvančický ( talk / contribs) 11:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Subject deceased — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.160.35 ( talk) 17:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Abid Qaiyum Suleri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Abid Qaiyum Suleri is a well-known scientist of Pakistan. I edited the article and added comprehensive references; however, the article has been resorted to the previous version. Pls help me in clarifying this move? Cheers -Dr Musi — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrMusi ( talk • contribs) 10:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
DrMusi ( talk) 10:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)DrMusi
( Sabazkot) sabazkot 11:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
EmDrive ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
We could use some assistance at EmDrive. There is a disagreement among involved editors about whether or not an unpublished paper titled Why Shawyer’s ‘electromagnetic relativity drive’ is a fraud is acceptable for criticizing the experimental work of Roger Shawyer, and aerospace engineer. See EmDrive#Shawyer's New Scientist article for how the source is used. The source is also used in three other citations. Thank you.- Mr X 18:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
There are some BLP-related discussions currently ongoing elsewhere, including a BLP RfC and a discussion at AN/I. A past & possibly relevant discussion from this board is also located here. Guy1890 ( talk) 00:11, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Clark Aldrich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Suggested or supposed real name is clearly not well known even if it is real - the chat is here /info/en/?search=Talk:Clark_Aldrich#Source
the story taken down is - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clark_Aldrich&diff=617005848&oldid=603837451
writer is using these Internet links
http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html - http://ceoroundtableblog.com/2011/12/frank-wezniak-photovac-member-in-the-news/ - http://www.mocavo.com/Clark-Wezniak-Lisa-Eastwood-Connecticut-Marriage-Record-Index-1959-2007/01780009497083875935 - pp 6-8) - Brown Alumni webzine: http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html
the take down editor has suggested a trolling issue and wrote this - According to documentation here ( https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27077549/Clark%20Aldrich.pdf), Clark Aldrich's birth surname was indeed Aldrich. Further, according to the same genealogy report, he is the 11th great grandson of both Governors John Winthrop and Thomas Dudley. This is consistent with his bio here: http://unschooling-rules.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html#bio At this point, insistence by the troll community at Get Off My Internets of the birth name Wezniak is best characterized as libelous. User:Intrepid French Learner
I do not understand so well the rules here - please assist, comment - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 18:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Augie Wolf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Awolf99 appears to be the biographical subject of Augie Wolf. He appears to take offense at content that I believe accurately summarizes a Los Angeles Times article. He contends that the article had factual inaccuracies. Ordinarily, I would revert with a mention of WP:TRUTH. What consideration should we give to the WP:BLP. According to Talk:Augie_Wolf#Content_removal_discussion, there was some discussion about this bio in Novmeber 2013.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
William Bastone ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A single purpose account is repeatedly adding unsourced negative material to the William Bastone article [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] and other articles, where they claim the subject endorses child prostitution. [6] At no point have any sources been added to support these accusations. Edward321 ( talk) 03:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Article semi-protected, dubious usernames blocked.
Gamaliel (
talk)
03:51, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Lindsey Doe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I came across an edit to Lindsey Doe on Huggle where the creator removed the notability tag and on the talk page has declared that it satisfies the BLP policy because she has x number of subscribers on Youtube based on WP:N#ENT. Does 130,000 Youtube subscribers count as notable? -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 04:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Clyde Lewis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A person or persons are continuously and repeatedly altering the Clyde Lewis page by inserting words such as "bizarre" and "farfetched" to describe this person in an attempt to defame his character. I have repeatedly removed the offensive, opinionated material as it detracts from the intended fact-based purpose of wikipedia. People read the articles on wikipedia to learn facts about the subject matter, not to read the opinions being inserted by vindictive persons with an agenda to malign the character of a person referenced in a wikipedia article. However, every time I remove the inappropriate content it is reinserted just a short time later. This has happened over and over again despite my ongoing efforts to keep the inappropriate material out of the article. "Bizarre" and "farfetched" are opinions, not facts, and have no place in a wikipedia article that had previously been 100% fact-based. The wording being inserted into this article is clearly done in a deliberate effort to portray Clyde Lewis as crazy. The article should contain facts, not opinions. If Clyde Lewis is crazy than the facts of the article will make that clear to the reader. Inserting opinions into this long-standing article for the sole purpose of defaming the subject of the article is not appropriate and devalues wikipedia as a whole. If the persons who have been altering the article feel so strongly about Clyde Lewis then they need to find a more appropriate website or other venue to make their opinions known, but wikipedia is not that place. I should not have to edit out the offensive material on a nearly daily basis just to keep the article objective and unbiased. This has gotten absurd and needs to come to an end.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Subglobal ( talk • contribs)
User:Localemediamonitor is writing stuff like this - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - rubbish verification imo Mosfetfaser ( talk) 20:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I have had to take down a replacement of the disputed content added without any chat at all by User: Bearian https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=prev&oldid=618033730 - sorry to see such an experienced wiki writer as User: Bearian edit warring this poorly sourced disputed story back into the wiki - Mosfetfaser ( talk)
there is some warring going on to rep[lace this disputed content - User:/Roberticus /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Roberticus has turned up to replace the disputed stony - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
" User:Localemediamonitor is attempting to war the story into the article again - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=618037931&oldid=618036813 - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
again to go to the story write - WP:PRIMARY and a you tube link that is removed because of copyright violation - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced blp:Primary and a you tube link - - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Mosfetfaser is now engaging in personal attacks against Bearian [7] and The Magnificent Clean-keeper [8] [9] Edward321 ( talk) 13:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Benjamin Netanyahu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Benjamin Netanyahu is not the first Israeli prime minister born in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin was born in Israel and was prime minister before Netanyahu.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpmonch ( talk • contribs)
Clark Aldrich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Suggested or supposed real name is clearly not well known even if it is real - the chat is here /info/en/?search=Talk:Clark_Aldrich#Source
the story taken down is - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clark_Aldrich&diff=617005848&oldid=603837451
writer is using these Internet links
http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html - http://ceoroundtableblog.com/2011/12/frank-wezniak-photovac-member-in-the-news/ - http://www.mocavo.com/Clark-Wezniak-Lisa-Eastwood-Connecticut-Marriage-Record-Index-1959-2007/01780009497083875935 - pp 6-8) - Brown Alumni webzine: http://alumni.brown.edu/classes/1954/events.html
the take down editor has suggested a trolling issue and wrote this - According to documentation here ( https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/27077549/Clark%20Aldrich.pdf), Clark Aldrich's birth surname was indeed Aldrich. Further, according to the same genealogy report, he is the 11th great grandson of both Governors John Winthrop and Thomas Dudley. This is consistent with his bio here: http://unschooling-rules.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html#bio At this point, insistence by the troll community at Get Off My Internets of the birth name Wezniak is best characterized as libelous. User:Intrepid French Learner
I do not understand so well the rules here - please assist, comment - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 18:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Augie Wolf ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Awolf99 appears to be the biographical subject of Augie Wolf. He appears to take offense at content that I believe accurately summarizes a Los Angeles Times article. He contends that the article had factual inaccuracies. Ordinarily, I would revert with a mention of WP:TRUTH. What consideration should we give to the WP:BLP. According to Talk:Augie_Wolf#Content_removal_discussion, there was some discussion about this bio in Novmeber 2013.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
William Bastone ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A single purpose account is repeatedly adding unsourced negative material to the William Bastone article [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] and other articles, where they claim the subject endorses child prostitution. [15] At no point have any sources been added to support these accusations. Edward321 ( talk) 03:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Article semi-protected, dubious usernames blocked.
Gamaliel (
talk)
03:51, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Lindsey Doe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I came across an edit to Lindsey Doe on Huggle where the creator removed the notability tag and on the talk page has declared that it satisfies the BLP policy because she has x number of subscribers on Youtube based on WP:N#ENT. Does 130,000 Youtube subscribers count as notable? -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 04:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Clyde Lewis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A person or persons are continuously and repeatedly altering the Clyde Lewis page by inserting words such as "bizarre" and "farfetched" to describe this person in an attempt to defame his character. I have repeatedly removed the offensive, opinionated material as it detracts from the intended fact-based purpose of wikipedia. People read the articles on wikipedia to learn facts about the subject matter, not to read the opinions being inserted by vindictive persons with an agenda to malign the character of a person referenced in a wikipedia article. However, every time I remove the inappropriate content it is reinserted just a short time later. This has happened over and over again despite my ongoing efforts to keep the inappropriate material out of the article. "Bizarre" and "farfetched" are opinions, not facts, and have no place in a wikipedia article that had previously been 100% fact-based. The wording being inserted into this article is clearly done in a deliberate effort to portray Clyde Lewis as crazy. The article should contain facts, not opinions. If Clyde Lewis is crazy than the facts of the article will make that clear to the reader. Inserting opinions into this long-standing article for the sole purpose of defaming the subject of the article is not appropriate and devalues wikipedia as a whole. If the persons who have been altering the article feel so strongly about Clyde Lewis then they need to find a more appropriate website or other venue to make their opinions known, but wikipedia is not that place. I should not have to edit out the offensive material on a nearly daily basis just to keep the article objective and unbiased. This has gotten absurd and needs to come to an end.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Subglobal ( talk • contribs)
User:Localemediamonitor is writing stuff like this - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - rubbish verification imo Mosfetfaser ( talk) 20:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I have had to take down a replacement of the disputed content added without any chat at all by User: Bearian https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=prev&oldid=618033730 - sorry to see such an experienced wiki writer as User: Bearian edit warring this poorly sourced disputed story back into the wiki - Mosfetfaser ( talk)
there is some warring going on to rep[lace this disputed content - User:/Roberticus /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/Roberticus has turned up to replace the disputed stony - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
" User:Localemediamonitor is attempting to war the story into the article again - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Clyde_Lewis&diff=618037931&oldid=618036813 - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 21:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
again to go to the story write - WP:PRIMARY and a you tube link that is removed because of copyright violation - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced blp:Primary and a you tube link - - seems to violate all wiki rules for living peeps - Lewis maintains that the notion of artificially-induced climate change - http://www.groundzeromedia.org/seeking-intellectual-honesty-about-global-warming/ - is a global conspiracy directly linked to Nazi ideals; he writes that efforts to combat perfectly natural climate change could lead to another Holocaust. This one would be carried out by the UN's "green police force, carrying out the same old and tired lies that led to genocidal directives that killed millions of people 70 years ago. " http://www.groundzeromedia.org/green-helmet/ Lewis also believes that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could have been a conspiracy designed to facilitate government gun control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rlmkkQ6iLY (accomplished by using devices to beam homicidal thoughts into the shooter's mind.) http://www.groundzeromedia.org/mental-hopscotch/ - Mosfetfaser ( talk) 22:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Mosfetfaser is now engaging in personal attacks against Bearian [16] and The Magnificent Clean-keeper [17] [18] Edward321 ( talk) 13:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Benjamin Netanyahu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Benjamin Netanyahu is not the first Israeli prime minister born in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin was born in Israel and was prime minister before Netanyahu.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gpmonch ( talk • contribs)
Ankit Mohan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have created this wiki page for A popular Hindi Television Actor, It is not poorly sourced, when I add sources/references they also get deleted. Why is Wikipedia behaving this way?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.236.134.199 ( talk • contribs)
Roger Goodman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
RED SLASH and Breawycker keep changing entry to include libelous material. RED SLASH has been contacted twice and refused to remove. Please see copy received earlier this evening from KOMO 4 News--showing that it is recognized that an error was made. They have corrected the libelous statement accordingly, therefore, any changes to reflect otherwise are considered intentional. I will be sending a copy of this message to both wiki editors. THANKS.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liv Grohn ( talk • contribs)
Tepai Moeroa ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
played his junior rugby league at Colyton Colts JRLFC from under 6 to under 10 before going to St Clair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.213.211 ( talk) 06:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
There is a website England & Wales Births 1837-2006 (which I refer to as "Find my past") where one can look up certain information about births registered in England and Wales.
Some people - including Trillionstarz ( talk · contribs) and 92.8.20.63 ( talk) - are using this website to give references for full names, full dates of birth, and place of birth. Unfortunately, none of those is given with 100% accuracy. Full names may be shortened, by abbreviating all the given names except the first; dates of birth are given no more accurately than a particular quarter of the year; and the place that is shown in the column headed "District" is not the actual place of birth, but the place where the birth was registered.
I have verified this by checking out around thirty members of my own extended family - only in about 75% of the cases does the district tally with the known place of birth. Two of my cousins, for example, who were born in Blackburn, have the district shown as Clitheroe, a town a few miles to the north: my uncle worked in Clitheroe at the time, and commuted there from Blackburn - he most probably found it easier to get to the Clitheroe registry office rather than the Blackburn one within office hours. Some of the other information has errors - when I looked up my own entry, it's not just truncated my second given name (the one by which I am usually known) to a single letter, but it's also got my mother's last name wrong - it's just a typo on one letter, but this shows that errors exist on that site. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 11:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Not living people, but I figured since this was where all the people who understood biography policies are, it was the best place for a good-faith notice of doing something novel. Dictionary of New Zealand Biography is the national biography of New Zealand. More than a decade ago there was a concerted effort to balance it for race, gender and class. Some of these people left few if any secondary sources as to their lives, resulting in encyclopaedia articles built entirely from primary sources. Some time ago I did a major push to get DNZB articles into wikipedia. Some of these balancing people are pretty borderline notability and quite a few got nominated at AfD. The overwhelming majority passed. There are a few problematic ones. In a (novel?) solution to this problem I've created a new section in the DNZB and am redirecting these very problematic ones to subsections there, but using persondata and cats on the redirect. See Barbara Weldon and Jessie Finnie. I'd appreciate feedback on this approach. Stuartyeates ( talk) 20:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
It's interesting that they have those entries, and I think it's better not to lose them, but a Wikipedia article probably shouldn't have a sentence directly explaining and referencing Wikipedia rules. The article is about the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, not Wikipedia. I also think it's OR to say that these are somehow "added", "extra", or "less-real" biographies. I think the assumption should be that the editors of the project added all bios they thought worth adding of people they thought worthy of study and note, and not an assumption that they added things they didn't fully believe in. I don't like the second-guessing of a reliable source with the idea that someone with no grounding in New Zealand history would write the reliable source differently. I think that these people were added to the original source text helps define them as noted, and should support inclusion of them somewhere.
There are masses of biographies that were taken from things like the Catholic Encyclopedia and many others in
Category:Wikipedia sources. Most of these articles have few or no secondary sources beyond inclusion in the reference work, if that reference is generally seen as a reliable source. Basically these people were the subject of scholarly study, and according to the source had some notability in their lifetimes: And, from about 1870, the West Coast Times court reporters became rather fond of publishing items about Barbara Weldon 'the notorious'.
__ E L A Q U E A T E
01:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Chris Alexander (editor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm coming here because of information on the page Chris Alexander (editor) and a discussion on the talk page that has grown somewhat heated. The article has a little history behind it and some of it can be seen at the AfD for the page. Knowing the history is somewhat important here, as Alexander himself is participating in the talk page. When the article was up for deletion, Alexander was concerned that the article was submitted to AfD out of malice. On July 16th a controversy section was added to the article that discussed a piece written for Fangoria by "Ben Cortman". (For the sake of diplomacy I'm not going to refer to it as either a review or an article, due to the nature of the discussion on the talk page.) The section stated that Alexander wrote the piece as a review with the intention to promote the film without stating that he was writing under a pseudonym. It was sourced via a site that Wikipedia would not consider to be a RS. I re-wrote the section since I felt that it wasn't really enough to warrant a separate section and I used a Bloody Disgusting article to back up the re-written information. It was the only RS I could really find that discussed the piece. This concerned me and I was also somewhat worried that it was a bit WP:UNDUE weight in Alexander's article, and voiced on a talk page that it would probably have been better in an overall controversy section on the Fangoria page if we could find enough information for a controversy section, as just about every major magazine has them. Alexander has come on to the article's talk page and argued that the piece was not supposed to be a review and that it was supposed to be a joke article. He also stated that the information in the BD article (which is an interview) was incorrect. The information has been removed and replaced several times. User:NinjaRobotPirate has been somewhat more involved with the discussion in the last few days since I went on vacation and was unable to get onto Wikipedia until today.
The question here is basically whether the information should be kept or removed. Some discussion will likely be necessary on the article's talk page, as that's where most of the discussion took place. I can see both side's argument, as I can see where it'd be interesting to add to Wikipedia and we do have the one source, but I can also see the argument that we should remove the information because we only have the one source. I do see BD as a RS but it's still only one source. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 00:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
High journalistic standards. The standards of one person. An ex-FANGORIA blogger on an obsessive revenge trip against the editor who he believes wronged him.
Like this latest, thoughtful, "feature": http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/fangoria-musick-presents-the-music-of-chris-alexander-editor-of-fangoria/
Or this classic: http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/charles-band-launches-delerium-magazine-chris-alexander-announced-as-eic/
Nope. I see nothing personal there. Just high-quality journalistic standards. Inspiring!
And now, Mr. Pace has managed to find work as a freelancer with MY ex-employer and closest competitor, Rue Morgue:
http://www.psychotronique.anidealforliving.com/rue-morgue-magazine-completes-transparency-survey/
Oh, the scandal!
I'll say my own 2 cents: Dave Pace grooves on scandal. By his own admission. And if he can't find any, he'll create some that suits his agenda. I've said before, after wasting SO much time arguing with this ex-blogger-o-mine on his awesome blog, that I would never address him again in a public forum because it is exactly what he wants and frankly, I think feelings were hurt on both sides. Not interested such things. And, as I've said, if the Wiki brain-trusts deem him and the erroneous Bloody Disgusting interview quote that stemmed from his blog, a valuable addition to my bio that they have created and maintain, I won't waste another word here. As Pace has said earlier here, Wiki is not my Twitter feed and I cannot control its contents.
But regardless of the outcome, I'm fully expecting and look forward the next Pace blog news item, in which he painstakingly details his triumphant battle with me on the back pages of Wikipedia, complete with screen grabs and IP address reveals. He'll share that link on his Facebook page. He'll share that link on a few horror message board forums. He'll say I'm a terrible, awful person and get a few high-fives from his fans. He'll sleep well.
High journalistic standards indeed!
-Chris Alexander — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.61.206 ( talk) 21:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
You confuse bullying with your own "truths", Dave. All I have done here is re-link to your own blog entries. You have a pattern of attack, spelled out over an entire year on your blog, literally right up until 2 days ago, it seems with that confusing "news" item about my new record label. All to perpetuate more fabricated scandal and position yourself as, what? Morally righteous? Some kind of crusader? 90% of your content is about FANGORIA, the only place that ever published you!It's mind-blowing and really, really strange. You came to Wikipedia to attach yourself to my personal bio, but you're a bit off-base if you think I'm not going to be explicitly clear about who you are, your past, your patterns and your motives, with the staff of Wikipedia.
And again, we both know this entire exchange will end up on yet another axe-grinding blog, a twitter post, a Facebook blast, a forum bell-ringing. Another tired public cry/challenge for me to "lawyer up". It's what you do. It's all you do. I'll NEVER try to silence you. I could care less what games you play with yourself on your blog. But, if pressed publicly, I WILL always be crystal clear about who you are in relation to me and to FANGORIA.
Good luck with Rue Morgue. Hope that works out for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.151.61.206 ( talk) 03:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Greg Mortenson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Somaly Mam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is absolutely no connection between these two people, but an editor keeps adding each of them to a "see also" section for the other in an attempt to tar them with the same brush. It has been admitted on talk that doing this in the text of the articles would violate the coatrack policy, but it is still being done as a See Also. Jonathunder ( talk) 19:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani contains a section called "Supporting Terrorism" which contains very presumptuous material, and offers little neutrality. It needs to be reviewed very carefully to form a less biased approach to the issue and offer a fairer characterization of the issue. Labeling multiple political groups as "terrorist organizations" is not helpful either, and it should not be so blatantly biased on a Wikipedia page. Such groups have their pros and cons which is for the reader to decide on their own respective time; we don't need to turn such controversial topics into 'facts' when there are many differing opinions on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.239.157 ( talk) 02:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Roy Stuart (photographer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Roy Stuart photographer page is often vandalized. The vandal consistently posts incorrect birthrates in order to make him appear to be older, posts other defamatory false information. The page needs to be protected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carldecanada ( talk • contribs)
Thane Rosenbaum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The issue here concerns Rosenbaum's recent WSJ article. Another editor added the paragraph a few days ago. "Roozee" deleted it and I've twice restored it. My explanation (from the Talk page): "My rationale for doing so was that this is a writing of the subject's that has generated controversy and attention. Indeed, as someone who closely follows the Israel/Palestinian conflict, I was unaware of who he was until he wrote the column in question. I did soften the language as the editing record shows. The contention of Roozee ... seems to be that the article is either insignificant given the volume of the subject's output and/or that the article has been misinterpreted. I think I've countered the former claim; for the latter claim, rather than deleting the reference, I think it'd be better to further massage the reference to assure NPOV."
Here's a diff page
Aemathisphd ( talk) 01:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Dick Cheney ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Donald Trump ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Have an edit warrior insisting that are "associated with the Tea Party Movement" based in one case on a speech given by Trump in front of a group which had some Tea Party members, as well as many non-members, and in the other case by Cheney saying the TPM was a "positive" for the Republican Party. No sources have been given making any greater links than those, which are prima facie insufficient for the contentious claim that they "support the Tea {Party" or are "associated with the Tea Party". Appropriate requests for a self-revert and pointers to WP:EW, WP:RS and WP:BLP have been given repeatedly. I am en vacance and would like someone to keep an eye on those BLPs please. Collect ( talk) 17:42, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The sources are (later ones were added by one editor but do not, IMO, strengthen his claims) :
As far as I can tell the sources do establish that he supports some specific ideals of the "tea party" and that he spoke before an audience which included members of the "tea party", and that in his Presidential campaign he spoke before at least one Tea Party group, as well as libertarians and others not associated with the "tea party" but is quite insufficient to say he is specifically a "person associated with the Tea Party movement" per se. Collect ( talk) 15:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Max Bennett (actor) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is an unbalanced article which has been repeatedly edited by the PR for the actor. It continually is edited to embellish the actor's CV by multiple anonymous sources. It takes film roles which constitute nothing but 'extra' work and pretends that these are substantial speaking roles. The article has been consistently abused to enhance the largely unknown actor's profile.
Wikipedia should consider deleting this article. There is no sense in having such an embellished CV online for a unknown theatre actor when several more established actors have very little written about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fightingliars ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Joseph A. Kéchichian ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Thank you for keeping a page on me but there are a few blatant errors in it and I am not sure where the author/s fished them.
What is correct is the intro: Joseph A. Kéchichian is an American scholar of Armenian descent, a renowned[1] historian and political scientist specializing on the Persian Gulf region, focusing in the domestic and regional concerns of Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. He [was] an Adjunct Professor of U.S.-Middle East Relations at UCLA and Pepperdine University, a senior researcher at the RAND Corporation in California , and is now a Senior Fellow at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
The next sentence is pure fabrication as I never attended Vanderbilt University, Duke University, or Georgetown University. Instead, I earned my PhD from the University of Virginia in 1985 [Department of Government and Foreign affairs]. Let me know if you need details about BA and MA and I will gladly provide them.
While the list of my books are accurate, you may want to update them:
The Al Sa‘ud Consigliere: Shaykh Youssef Yassin of Sa‘udi Arabia [forthcoming]
‘Iffat Al Thunayan: An Arabian Queen, London: Sussex Academic Press, 2015.
Legal and Political Reforms in Saudi Arabia, London and New York: Routledge, November 2012 (January 2013 for the paperback edition).
Power and Succession in Arab Monarchies, Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008 [translated into Arabic as Al-Sultah wa-Ta‘aqub al-Hukm fil-Mamalikah al-‘Arabiyyah, 2 volumes, Beirut and London: Riad El-Rayyes Books, 2012].
Faysal: Saudi Arabia’s King for All Seasons, Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida, 2008 [translated into Arabic as Faysal: Al-Malik wal-Dawlah, Beirut: Dar al-‘Arabiyyah lil-Mawsu‘at, 2012].
Extremism & Opposition Movements on the Arabian Peninsula, New Delhi: Observer Research Foundation, 2006.
Political Participation and Stability in the Sultanate of Oman, Dubai: Gulf Research Center, 2005 [translated into Arabic as Al-Musharakah al-Siyasiyyah wal-Istikrar fi Sultanat ‘Uman, Dubai: Gulf Research Center, 2005].
The Just Prince: A Manual of Leadership (with R. Hrair Dekmejian), London: Saqi Books, 2003 [translated into Turkish as Adil Hükümdar, Istanbul: Kirmizi Kedi Yayenevi, 2009].
Succession in Saudi Arabia, [New York: Palgrave (2001) [translated into Arabic as Al-Khilafah fil-‘Arabiyyah al-Su‘udiyyah, Beirut and London: Dar Al Saqi, 2003].
Iran, Iraq, and the Arab Gulf States, editor, New York: Palgrave, 2001.
A Century in Thirty Years: Shaykh Zayed and the United Arab Emirates, editor, Washington, D.C.: The Middle East Policy Council, 2000.
Oman and the World: The Emergence of an Independent Foreign Policy, Santa Monica: RAND, 1995.
Political Dynamics and Security in the Arabian Peninsula through the 1990s, MR-167- AF/A, Santa Monica: RAND, 1993.
A simple Amazon search or a Google search would have provided these details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.126.129.76 ( talk) 16:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Tim McKnight ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.147.56.4 ( talk) 02:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Dan Sebring ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Dan Sebring article does not show the notability of the subject. In addition, some of the material is copy/pasted from a source, one of the "sources" is Sebring's Facebook page, among other issues. The anonymous editors 107.209.244.18 and 69.131.98.54 have only edited on this article, specifically replacing poorly sourced material that has been removed by other Wikipedia member editors. Please let me know if there is some other action I should take aside from posting here (I am somewhat new at Wikipedia). Thanks! Seen a Mike ( talk) 16:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Yank Barry ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Yank Barry lawsuit, now dismissed/withdrawn, is mentioned in the article Yank Barry#Court cases. When it was first brought up Talk:Yank Barry#Lawsuit, there were BLP objections, and they were ignored, and I brought it up again (under an erroneous section title) Talk:Yank Barry#Lawsuit against WMF in the article?. I find the discussion has been pretty lame, sometimes utterly ridiculous. So far as I can tell, its mention in the article is a clearcut violation of WP:PUBLICFIGURE (one third-party reference only) and WP:BLPPRIMARY (not cited in the article, but part of the talk page "proof" that this is supposed to be "significant", and later, to justify providing "balance" regarding the closure of the lawsuit, so far). Some of the posters explicitly stated that its presence makes sense in light of YB's pattern of behavior regarding filing silly lawsuits in general, as if that were relevant. One extremely experienced editor stated point-blank that since lawsuits typically involve lots of money, any lawsuit is of course significant. Choor monster ( talk) 15:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Maria Vacratsis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Since I put in the article she voiced the Queen_Metallia in the English dub of Sailor Moon; though many people don't know her for anime role very well. Should there a be reference to that statement? Is it a policy of Wikipedia to have a Citation_needed? Venustar84 ( talk) 19:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Ira Casson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The newly created BLP Ira Casson appears to exist solely to present the controversial aspects of the subject. There is nothing positive in the article. Gnome de plume ( talk) 12:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you editors for changing this article. You editors have convinced me to agree with what you were saying. His research was notable, but it would be better to have more biographical content to make an article on him. Making an article on the committee itself would be much better. Robert4565 ( talk) 16:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC) (the creator of the original article)
I didn't intend to give this guy a bad reputation, I was just just trying to add notable research to an encyclopedia. Robert4565 ( talk) 16:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Flávio Kenup ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone help with a source check to see whether "a.k.a. Viola Kenup" is legimate unsourced comment or not. Thanks. In ictu oculi ( talk) 10:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Nico Rosberg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An IP has been adding their own commentary at Nico Rosberg despite being told not to do so on multiple occasions. I've reverted three times and I'm unsure on what to do next. Can someone take a look? Thanks. NQ talk 16:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Curt Clawson (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views)- I wanted to get some uninvolved input on this discussion. This new congressman has been in office for about a month. Last week, he made a public speaking faux pas in which he mistakenly thought 2 US govt. employees appearing at a committee were from India rather than Indian-American. There is no dispute that the incident took place. What is being disputed is the merit of including it.
I contend this is textbook
WP:RECENTISM, nothing more than a minor incident that got some coverage during the news cycle and quickly drops to obscurity. Including it is giving it UNDUE weight. Arguments for inclusion have been:
This user was unhappy that three other editors disagreed on having that material deleted, so he posted here to seek additional input. The discussion is at Talk:Curt Clawson - Cwobeel (talk) 16:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
John Walsh (U.S. politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The NY Times recently reported that they had uncovered what they allege is evidence that Senator Walsh plagiarized up to 2/3 of his 2007 master's thesis at the U.S. Army War College . The Times' allegations, Senator Walsh's responses (claiming variously that he didn't think he'd done anything wrong, that it was or was not explained by PTSD, and/or that it was unintentional) and news that the War College is investigating have been widely and extensively covered by numerous reliable sources including CBS News, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Fox News and others.
Currently any mention of this is buried in 4 3 bland sentences (after Montanabw
just reverted one of them) in a section titled
2014 election near the very end of article. When
Presbyterian1
tried to move it into an earlier section on education,
Montanabw
reverted with the edit remark, "Drop the effing stick, Presbyterian1 before we have you blocked."
In discussion on the talk page at Talk:John Walsh (U.S. politician)#Plagiarism allegation, Montanabw opposes additional coverage arguing WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENTISM and that we should wait until the War College makes a decision. Wehwalt also opposes, arguing WP:BLP. Billmckern argues that the coverage should be one place but does not appear to oppose a more in-depth treatment.
It appears to me WP:UNDUE does not apply insofar as this is certainly not about a minority or "fringe" theory, nor does WP:RECENTISM apply insofar as this is not a story of "flimsy, transient merits". And while this is indeed a WP:BLP, Senator Walsh is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE, meaning that "If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it."
My concern is with what appears to be a case of whitewashing by editors who may/may not be completely WP:NPOV and whose behavior may be overly and inappropriately protective of the subject. May I request additional opinions, please? Msnicki ( talk) 02:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
(od) At this point, it is well past "allegation" as the use of unattributed material is freely admitted by that Senator. It belongs in two places - under his education and under his career, as it is intrinsically directly applicable to each for different reasons. (The first reason being directly related to his academic history, the second for the possible loss of rank in the Army, being separate issues) The kidnapping of verbiage for at least 1/4 of his entire thesis is well documented at this point - vide [19] and [20] which has The Army War College, in Pennsylvania, said it has found preliminary evidence of plagiarism and asked a review board to investigate. The school may revoke Walsh's degree if it finds he intentionally presented the work of others as his own. which clearly states it is past the "allegation" stage. None of these sources appears t have any partisan bias against Walsh. A single mention that the problem exists should be as brief as possible in the lead primarily because readers will expect to find it noted in at least five words there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collect ( talk • contribs)
Okay, it's done. Feel free to complain, but I think I did this correctly and fairly. Msnicki ( talk) 04:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Nick Burdi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The wiki biography for nick has been trolled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.218.2 ( talk) 13:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Christopher Mtikila ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I do not know if this article meets notability, but it is a highly critical, unsourced article. My first reaction was to nominate it for deletion, but I would like to hear any responses first. I know nothing about the subject, and came to the article after seeing him interviewed in a pbs documentary. TFD ( talk) 01:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Dylan Penn ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could some of the experts here please assist the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Dylan_Penn on writing a BLP-compliant DYK hook for the main page?-- 184.147.144.166 ( talk) 10:55, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Rich Constable ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Could BLPN regulars please take a look at the Rich Constable article - it has been raised at the help desk by an IP who suggests that it is being edited in an unduly negative manner, [22] and from a quick look, I'm inclined to agree that there may be problems. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 03:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
User: Djflem is obsessed with posting negative POV about the BLP. Every day he edits this page by providing articles and information to bolster Mayor Dawn Zimmer's unproven and uncharged allegation of extortion. Djflem also gave serious treatment to matters that are marginally relevant to Constable for the sole purpose of making him look bad (See HGI and COAH discussion). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:1506:76ED:2159:80B4:EA3D:F423 ( talk) 14:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Michael French ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
According to this article, French doesn't talk to tabloids, like London Evening Standard and The Mirror. As for the bio information, I don't think sources are trustworthy. But what can I do? -- George Ho ( talk) 18:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Dave Horne ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
written by Dave Horne. This is an autobiography — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.2.33 ( talk) 06:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Aize Obayan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article appears un-encyclopedic, promotional with notice of WP:COI policy violation connected with the article creator. I proposed the article for deletion but darreg ( talk · contribs) who was the article creator reverted the edit and even clean-up all maintainance tags on the article. Wikicology ( talk) 17:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Elizabeth Hollingworth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Elizabeth Hollingworth is an Australian judge who issued a 'super injunction' against (as I understand it) the publishing of allegations related to a claims made by Gillian Bird. The injunction was leaked by wikileaks and uploaded to commons. An editor linked to the commons copy from Elizabeth Hollingworth's article. The whole thing is a BLP nightmare that's likely to blow up if/when details get published in the local press. Even if the current coverage is appropriate, extra eyes would be appreciated for that eventuality. Stuartyeates ( talk) 22:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Bennett Ratliff ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The edits by Anomalocaridid include information that is generated by sources with a documented history of political attacks, misleading information, and a clear political agenda for the scores, reports and opinions that are produced. The particular groups cited vigorously supported the opponent of Bennett Ratliff in the last election with lies, innuendo, and misleading information and thus cannot be considered as impartial, unbiased sources that should be included in the BLP page. Mr. Ratliff would like to protect his reputation from false and misleading information about his service to the State of Texas.
Michael J. Meade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
a search of the Huffington post reveals mentions of Michael Meade by other authors but no articles authored by Michael Meade. To the best of my ability I cannot find a single article written by Meade on the Huffington post site let alone frequent contributions.
Abhay Kumar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am reporting the article Abhay K for notability. He is just a diplomat, with some minimal work, just like any other diplomat of any other country. This is a very well constructed Wikipedia article, possibly written by Abhay K himself, but it certainly does not merit inclusion. If this merits conclusion, every public servant in every country should be on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.73.190.194 ( talk) 04:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Bob Isherwood ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I recently went through and added citations and edited the article for Bob Isherwood and was hoping this would get rid of the warning header at the top about needing citations (which is several years old and no longer relevant). I know this may not be the place to post this but I'm curious as to how I would go about getting rid of that header now that the article is properly cited and the header no longer applies.
Thanks! JLarson15 ( talk) 05:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks so much,
Regarding the "reads like a resume" tag (which is also over 3 years old), it doesn't look like that applies anymore either with updated sources and information, and the more editorial aspects taken out. Is it possible to get that tag removed as well?
Thanks again JLarson15 ( talk) 20:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Scott Woods ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The official website does not lead to Scott Woods' website. It leads to http://www.blackair.org/ which is now a commercial site on tax preparation. I cannot find the official website for Scott Woods' poetry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.237.64.89 ( talk) 10:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Done I've removed the flaky EL and replaced it with the official web site. I've also added 4 cites and revised the article. Its now up to WP standards.-- —
Keithbob •
Talk •
19:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Ralph Drollinger ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article needs some careful attention. In May, I fully-protected it for 2 weeks [32] in response [33] to a RFPP request [34] by User:Demiurge1000.
Today I had a rather odd request on my talk [35] from User:Accuracymattersman, asking me to block an editor who was allegedly to have "a vendetta" against the subject.
A little investigation shows that there is an long term edit war on this page, so I have fully protected it indefinitely. [36] (I initially protected it for 2 months, [37] but decided that this was inadequate)
The subject is a former pro basketball player, who later became involved with a Christian group called Capitol Ministries. This relationship involved a dispute and litigation, and the edit war relates to that dispute.
The two editors involved in the current edit war are both single-purpose accounts:
The article was previously edited extensively by another apparent SPA AccuracyInPosting ( talk · contribs).
The situation has previously been discussed on the article's talk page, where admin Zagalejo and Orangemike both noted the relevance of WP:BLPPRIMARY#Misuse_of_primary_sources.
The backlinks show that this article has been discussed at ANI December 2012, and here at WP:BLP/N on multiple occasions: November 2010, April 2011, October 2012. It has been mentioned at WP:COIN in November 2010, while Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/RK_Drollinger/Archive is a very busy page.
All three usernames, and their WP:SPA histories, along with their persistent use of primary sources related to a current legal dispute, make me think of WP:THETRUTH.
I do not have the time to review all of the sources in detail, so as an initial step I have removed [38] nearly all of the section relating to Capitol Ministries. There may be some material which should be reinstated, but I think that it is better for a BLP to under-report a particular topic than to retain contested info derived from primary sources.
The usual practice with page protection is for the protecting admin simply to protect the latest version. Having taken the unusual step of following protection with the removal of content, I will leave a note at WP:AN inviting other admins to review my actions and revert them as they see fit. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 22:21, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Marek Dochnal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek_Dochnal) presents false informations about the person: - all press links talking about Dochnal trials and allegations have been repeatedly removed (14 links to press publications concerning Dochnal trial are missing, 2 irrelevant links are put instead and one of them is Dochnal website), - the article contains spurious suggestion that Dochnal trial had political background while Dochnal has been validly sentenced for bribery, which is well documented in multiple press publications. The latest (27.07.2014) news regards court order of imprisonment of Dochnal, issued by District Court of Warsaw City, on 27 of July ( http://niezalezna.pl/57763-dochnal-bedzie-siedzial-sad-wydal-nakaz-doprowadzenia-przestepcy-za-kratki), - the article contains spurious suggestion that Dochnal case is similar to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Khodorkovsky case while Dochnal guilt was proven and announced in valid court sentence in 2013. - the article suggests that European Court has spoken up for Dochnal innocence ("In September 2012 Marek Dochnal won a long awaited case against Poland in The European Court Of Human Rights in Strasbourg") which is deliberate manipulation.
This article should be tagged to warn readers of spurious informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.243.164.159 ( talk) 00:43, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Can the watchers here please opine on the weight of the controversy and criticism sections of this article? To be certain, His views and columns have agitated quite a few, but that is no cause for this article to be slanted, especially towards more recent events of the past decade. I've noticed this sort of "creep" in articles of all stripes. Might some consolidation be in order? Two kinds of pork ( talk) 01:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Jacqueline Fernandez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There's been ongoing disputes about the subject of the articles date of birth. [ [39]] had dates of birth that was a combination of sources. Two sources gave a month and a day but no year, one of which was a twitter source, the third was a source with just a year. I removed them because to my view it's original research we can not take the sources add them together and get a full DOB as this qualifies as WP:OR. One editor has disagreed with my assessment of the sources and requirement. It's been discussion and no edit wars so no issues with User:Bollyjeff I thought this just might be a good way for a BLP consensus for DOB as this issue has been onging for more then a year by the talkpage. Dear lord why are Bollywood articles DOB BLP info crazy? Lol thanks folks. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 03:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Gossip mag? Okay here are two of the biggest newspapers in India, The Times of India [46] and Hindustan Times [47] recently saying the same thing. Your friend Mr red pen is known to be found of removing content and fighting consensus rather than contributing to the project in a meaningful manner. I think this is pretty much settled with the agreement of the un-involved third parties above. BollyJeff | talk 22:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Is there any genuine dispute about this woman's date of birth? I fully understand the theoretical points being made here, but we have articles with unsourced negative statements and even falsehoods that need attention, not to mention articles that could use general improvement and upgrading, so can we limit the arguing about things that are of peripheral concern? Newyorkbrad ( talk) 01:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Alan Guth ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone take a quick look and tell me if talk page edits like this and this, describing the subject of the page as a "fraud," requires intervention? I'm not conversant with the latest BLP rules and practices and I am in disputes with the editor in question on other fronts (original research, civility, editing and discussion practices, etc), so I think I'm the wrong person to even try to make the call. Thanks for taking a look.. -- SCZenz ( talk) 07:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Ashok Chauhan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm in a content dispute over this BLP article with several IP's. The section "Controversies" contains claims about arrest warrants against the subject. The claims are supported by an article by Tim Sullivan ( AP) from 2007, which was adapted/reprinted by other newspaper outlets, also cited in our article. However, a critical article by Mint (newspaper) has an update stating that "A Frankfurt court has also ruled that there are no crimincal proceedings against Chauhan and that the arrest warrant issued has been revoked." From what I have learned during my previous research, the business with education in India is a very dirty business, but I have a question: Is it appropriate to associate a living person in an encyclopedic article with arrest warrants that have been revoked? The last revert at least mentions that "the charges have been later cancelled" (my earlier addition/update), which is better but I have to ask for an independent opinion. My opponents cite WP:PUBLICFIGURE as an argument, and it might be a valid argument. What do you think about that? -- Vejvančický ( talk / contribs) 11:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Subject deceased — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.160.35 ( talk) 17:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Abid Qaiyum Suleri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Abid Qaiyum Suleri is a well-known scientist of Pakistan. I edited the article and added comprehensive references; however, the article has been resorted to the previous version. Pls help me in clarifying this move? Cheers -Dr Musi — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrMusi ( talk • contribs) 10:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
DrMusi ( talk) 10:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)DrMusi
( Sabazkot) sabazkot 11:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
EmDrive ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
We could use some assistance at EmDrive. There is a disagreement among involved editors about whether or not an unpublished paper titled Why Shawyer’s ‘electromagnetic relativity drive’ is a fraud is acceptable for criticizing the experimental work of Roger Shawyer, and aerospace engineer. See EmDrive#Shawyer's New Scientist article for how the source is used. The source is also used in three other citations. Thank you.- Mr X 18:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
There are some BLP-related discussions currently ongoing elsewhere, including a BLP RfC and a discussion at AN/I. A past & possibly relevant discussion from this board is also located here. Guy1890 ( talk) 00:11, 4 August 2014 (UTC)