This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
These two bio pages contain questionable and non-reliable references which question the neutrality of the pages. I tried several times to tag the articles but User:Justice007 keep reverting my tags and accusing me for being personally against the subjects of articles. Rather than going into edit warring I prefer to leave that matter to other editors. Please look into this. -- Saqib ( talk) 07:13, 7 January 2017 (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.
William "Wild Bill" Wykpisz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This page is a joke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.90.211.9 ( talk) 21:32, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
This mentions a student with no article who evidently shouted at someone and an associate professor, again with no article, although this story did gain more traction. However the Guth comment if kept should have more context. [1] [2] Doug Weller talk 15:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Otabek Mahkamov ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) seems to have some serious claims added last April. As the sources are in Uzbek and not English, I am not sure of their validity. Needs to be checked by someone with skills in Uzbek. Two sources are 404, one source is a scanned letter on Google drive.
The accessdate is not the date the ref was added. This diff appears to be where much of the information has been added. Several attempts have been made to remove with no comment. It appears to have been replaced. I undid a few removals via Huggle and got this message w/ contact info on my talk page which was later deleted by the same IP: diff No idea how to proceed here. So, I added this ticket. Jim1138 ( talk) 08:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
To whom this may concern,
The article headlined Rachael Maza Long Is incorrectly labeled. I am writing on behalf of my mother who this article is written about. She has been divorced for some years now and her name is now "Rachael Zoa Maza" or just "Rachael Maza". Her last name is no longer "Long". If this could be changed that would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Ariel Maza Long — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariel Maza Long ( talk • contribs)
Simon Howard ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am the subject of this article. I am not very familiar with editing Wikipedia, and while I have read the policies on editing, editing articles where you are the subject, and biographies of living persons, I am not quite sure where I stand on some of my concerns about this article about me. My concerns are broadly in three parts.
Firstly: I am not a particularly well-known public health figure, and not sure that I am sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia page. Similarly, some of the work cited in the page is not at all noteworthy (e.g. presentation given to a small group at Cumberland Lodge, or poster on invasive group A strep presented at a conference).
Secondly: The tone of the page does not appear balanced, but appears to be constructed to portray me in a negative light. For example, copy in the page editorialises beyond quotes (e.g. "Howard has also criticised investment in cycling facilities as an anti-obesity intervention" and "Howard has claimed that there is an association between suicide and the use of social media", neither of which is supported by the quotations and sources cited). Authorship of some sources is attributed disproportionately to me, even when I was not the lead author of the work in question (e.g. "Simon Howard et al, Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer"). To be in a list of acknowledgements in the book The Drugs Don't Work hardly merits a description as a 'contributor' to the work, which implies authorship.
Thirdly: There are many factual errors in this page. I am not an academic. My editorship of the CMO report was certainly not "only the second time someone other than the Chief Medical Officer of the day has edited the statutory Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer". I am not cited as a contributor to all of Dame Professor Sally Davies's other annual reports. My blog (which is still active!) is referred to in the past tense - and I am not aware of anyone 'citing' the discussion on the blog's comments section about aborted foetuses (and no source is provided for this claim). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjhoward ( talk • contribs) 19:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Jani Kadiyatu Jallah Kollie ( talk · contribs · count) is trying to maintain a promotional version of C. Cyvette M. Gibson. The subject is a living, currently-active politician in Liberia. I tried to engage on the talk page and provided warning about the BLP discretionary sanctions on their user talk. Regardless, Jani Kadiyatu Jallah Kollie has reverted me twice today here and here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a question on the talk page of this article regarding the sources used in the Partial list of television appearances section, and some discussion on the matter on the article talk page. John Carter ( talk) 20:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Recently subject to a large amount of vandalism, I have stubbed this page because of the unsourced claims of violence and murder against members of this sect. There are indeed some sources, but the existing article effectively blamed one person for the murder of one person and violence against others. There may well be reliable sources for the claims that this was the case; if anyone is more familiar with the case I would urge them to add them in. Otherwise the article as it stands cannot claim as such. Black Kite (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
An economist called David Malpass is apparently unfortunate enough to have one WP:SPA adding WP:SYNTH negative implications about him in the Wikipedia article about him, and another SPA removing them again. More eyes would be useful, especially because the negative one recently reached autoconfirmed if I understand the rules correctly. Many thanks. (One of the SPAs posted here on this noticeboard before, but there was no response.) MPS1992 ( talk) 20:52, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
A triple play. All three are puff pieces, apparently written by the public relations department at CAA Sports. Thoughts and assistance cleaning these up are welcome. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:48, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Depuffed. Collect ( talk) 21:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Jacob Barnett ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have a question at RSN that crosses multiple policy issues. The question is at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Jacob Barnett, and it is about whether a dead YouTube URL is a reliable source for a previously published video of a kid now being unavailable. (It's possible that this source is unreliable but that the content will remain because the others might be, but I specifically want to know whether this one source is reliable for this claim about a BLP.) Please consider looking at this request. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 18:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
User:WhatamIdoing, no one claimed that the dead link verified anything in itself, and you damn well know it. It has been explained to you by two different editors. Sławomir Biały ( talk) 02:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I posted a concern on the talk page of Vonda Phelps after @ Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): claimed to have contacted a relative of the individual to supply birth and death information and bolstered it with primary sources. While I assume good faith and don’t doubt that this is true, I’m concerned that it runs afoul of WP:V for reasons listed on the talk page. Since the user who added the material originally disagrees, I thought I would bring it up here to get a third opinion (I consider it a BLP issue because, as noted on the talk page, there’s no ‘’verifiable’’ evidence that she is deceased, even though it was likely, thus why she was in the possibly living people category previously). If consensus is that the new information is fine to include, then I’m happy to withdraw my challenge. Canadian Paul 19:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
The article was recently deleted via G11 by editor DGG. I believe this was not a correct invoking of the G11 policy. I'd argue that the article was written in a mostly neutral point of view, which you can examine from this archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20151128223554//info/en/?search=Kevin_Pho
It's also a problematic deletion because the subject passes GNG quite easily. Although, the sources in the article were pretty sparse, there are many available:
And many more...
Medicalreporter ( talk) 13:38, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Non-urgent: I don't think there's an edit war going on that I can see, so maybe here is not the right place to note it - just a jumble of dubiously sourced promotion for a Brazilian yogi. Would benefit experienced BLP editors to trim and de-peacock. In ictu oculi ( talk) 22:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
This article has had problems with highly promotional, WP:SPA editing since it's creation that hasn't let up. Krainak ( talk · contribs) has responded to my concerns, and I think this is a good time to get others involved. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
About content of the movie From Beginning to End and biographies of Brazilian protagonists Rafael Cardoso and Joao Gabriel Vasconselos[edit source]
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT NOTICE
The movie from Beginning to End HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH INCEST OR HOMOSEXUALITY, as mentioned in the biography of Brazilian protagonist Rafael Cardoso. This movie is a COMPLETE ALLEGORY and a portrait of the healthy integrated person and their development. The brothers represent different sides of the same person. The water, omnipresent throughout the movie, represents the subconscious, where the Self swims and emerges from. The scene in the movie where they undress in the white room (representing the psycho-mental interior) represent the stage where the person integrates intimate Truths about her/himself to create continuity of the Self.(1) The scene where they explain why they love each other is how a person with a healthy self esteem relates to themselves. The Mother represents the Higher Self, who is completely non-judgemental and guides the person with solutions(cures) about everything. The man who comes to warn the mother about the sexual aspect of the boy's relationship is what we call the Devil, he comes to create disharmony and problems because he is very jealous, he can not integrate-he can not stand up to his responsibilities. The movie has a happy ending, because the future for a healthy person can only be bright, loving and full of happiness.
(1) See The Living Book of Nature. by Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov,Chapter 7-The Naked Truth
Eleutherius1 ( talk) 08:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed a claim that this person "developed" Sesame Street since I have been unable to find a reliable source for that other than his own promotional materials. The article has many other problems, possibly including the fact that he is called a "sex criminal" at the beginning. Yes, he was convicted of three sexually related misdemeanors in 1982, and was sentenced to nine months in jail. My concern is that the article may devote undue weight to those misdemeanors from 35 years ago, without providing explanation or context. I would appreciate the opinions of other editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
THE INFORMATION ON DIANNE HOUSTON'S LIFE AND CAREER IS FALSE AND MISLEADING. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:91CB:4D00:79A1:F3A8:6209:4E9F ( talk) 07:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Can someone please help me make a page. I'm not that versed in how to do that. My page is up for deletion after many tabloid rumor postings. I guess I'd rather have it deleted than have tabloid lies up about me but I would prefer to have my work speak for its self. Here are a few articles I found and IMDB has a list of most of my credits. Any and all help would be appreciated. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0741672/publicity?ref_=nm_pdt_pub_sm Thank you, Sherrie Rose — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.40.165.65 ( talk) 18:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think the article Gregor Wenning should be removed. It contains information which are of no interest for the reader. For instance: "was born on 21 March 1964 to Karl-Heinz Wenning, a school teacher, and Elisabeth Wenning (née Terwort), a secretary. One of his brothers is the German church musician and composer Martin Wenning." or "In 1995, he married neurologist Roberta Granata-Wenning; they have two sons (Maximilian and Marco)". Such kind of information is simply ridiculous. Prof. Wenning is neither Freud nor Charcot. He is Authors of several scientific papers. However there are hundreds if not thousands of neurologists who published more outstanding studies without necessarily having been the subject of a Wikipedia article. Clearly, this page was written as an act of self promotion, is of very little (if any) utility to the general reader and, as such, should be removed. Quixote12 ( talk) 11:32, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I think I listed this article here before, but it did not receive any attention. The subject is no doubt notable, but the article is part CV and part hagiography. There are not one but two galleries of images, and other lists of information that I believe do not belong in a biography, such as the masters theses he has supervised. I would like a second opinion before I start paring it down. AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 02:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Rael Levitt is a South African auctioneer who had a dispute over an auctioned property. The dispute was well covered in the media and Levitt was accused of various wrongful acts (fraud / auction rigging / etc). In several court cases that followed, Levitt was found NOT GUILTY of all charges laid against him and was acquitted of all allegations. His Wikipedia page edited by Bbb23 makes fabricated references to tabloid TV programs which painted Levitt in a negative light and references articles written by Fiona Forde (a tabloid journalist) in the main body of his Wikipedia page. This version of the page has been constructed in breach of Wikipedia's Biograohy of Living Persons Policy. It is advanced that Levitt's page should read like this:
In 2012, a dispute arose over a property that Rael Levitt brought to public auction. [1] The dispute was covered extensively in the media and Levitt stepped down as CEO of Auction Alliance and as a member of the national auction association. [2] In a series of court cases that followed, Levitt was vindicated of the fraud charges laid against him. [3] Various local and provincial divisions of South African courts held that Levitt was not guilty of fraud. [4]
In contrast, Bbb23 has written his page:
In 2012, Levitt stepped down as CEO of Auction Alliance and as a member of the national auction association.[13][14] The National Consumer Commission found that Rael Levitt had transgressed South Africa’s new Consumer Protection Act and issued a compliance notice in favour of Wendy Appelbaum[15] The ruling was overturned by the National Consumer Tribunal on 11 July 2012. Levitt won a number of cases against the Consumer Commission and the Estate Agency Affairs Board.[16] In 2012 the investigative TV programme Carte Blanche twice featured Rael Levitt. In the first part, Levitt was seen driving away at speed out of the garage of the Auction Alliance offices in Johannesburg after being told that they were there to interview him. In a follow up segment a few months later, a voice on an intercom at his apartment building allegedly changed to an African accent when told that they wanted to interview him.[17] On 23 June 2012 Wendy Appelbaum laid an attempted fraud charge against Rael Levitt. In August 2012, Levitt's apartment and Auction Alliance offices around South Africa were raided by the South African Police's Hawks crime unit [18] In April 2015, Levitt and Auction Alliance lost their battle at the South African Constitutional Court over the search warrants used to seize documents and the hard drives. The Court ordered that Levitt and Auction Alliance bear the legal costs.[19] The dismissal of the legal challenge to the search warrants has now allowed the police investigation of alleged fraud and money laundering by Auction Alliance and Levitt to proceed. The South African police conducted an investigation into fraud and money laundering as well as all auctions Levitt and Auction Alliance handled between January 2003 and February 2012.[20] On 13 May 2016 Fiona Forde wrote another 7-day media series that published an investigative report on alleged suspicious activities at the company that she alleged had been commissioned by the Auction Alliance Board in March 2012. Levitt and Auction Alliance lost a court bid to prevent the publication of the report.[21]
References
( David Ricksonberg ( talk) 08:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC))
Víctor M. Marroquín ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Would it be possible to get some more experienced BLP editors to watch Víctor M. Marroquín? There has been some IPs editing and a claim was made that they might be doing so for personal reasons. I first came across the article via this Teahouse post, but am not sure whether this is a "notability" problem or something which can be cleaned up. The IP who made the above has also been removing maintenance templates without explanation or addressing the issues. I've encouraged them to use the talk page or discuss their concerns here, but not sure if they will. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Nolan Crouse ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
there are repeatedly derogatory comments being posted about me
I am Nolan Crouse and someone continues to post incorrect and derogatory comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.243.32 ( talk) 01:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Note that sources are being used for claims not made in those sources, and that I am barred from doing a damn thing about it. Collect ( talk) 17:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Date of birth is wrong by 5 years.
Steve Byers was born in 1974. I attended school with him for several years (all of high school) and can assure you he was in my grade.
He was actually older than me by almost a year as I had skipped a grade in elementary school.
I am also fairly certain he was not born on New Year's Eve. That would be a detail that nobody would forget.
You can confirm this information by obtaining a copy of "The Howl", Unionville High School's year book. You will find Byers in the class of 1993.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.197.160.45 ( talk) 19:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I am appealing for an editor to review the intro section to the Dan Wagner page which has been repeatedly vandalised by a particular user using multiple pseudonyms. The intro was altered originally in 2014 having been accurate for more than a decade prior, the edits have materially misrepresented the subjects' achievements. In particular, as can be seen clearly by the body of the page which describes the numerous business' set up by the subject (of which two became market leaders and sold for in excess of multiple billions of dollars), the intro centres on the drop in share price for one of the companies (during the dot com crash - which affected 99% of all tech companies in the world) and another of the many companies founded by the subject which went into administration (the only one that did so in fact).
According to 'WayBackMachine' the intro to the page read as follows between 2000 and 2014: "Dan Wagner (born 28 July 1963) is an English entrepreneur and businessman. He was one of the first British-based Internet entrepreneurs, having founded M.A.I.D (Marketing Analysis & Information Database) in 1984, a company which provided online information services. It made over 200,000 publications available from 192 countries. He was educated at Merchant Taylors' School, Northwood and University College School, London. After briefly joining Richer Sounds as a salesman he went to work for WCRS advertising in 1981. In 1984, Wagner founded MAID (Market Analysis and Information Database) which was one of the first online information repositories and Wagner as CEO was responsible for its development and growth, building it from zero to 26% of the global on-line information market."
In 2014 and subsequently, User:Ol King Col (and the same user under the guise User:185.145.156.53) has made numerous disparaging edits to the page which have been subsequently undone and re-worded by numerous other wiki contributors but often resulting in an edit war. The impact of Wikipedia cannot be understated and these edits have now been referenced as factual by various lazy media outlets who use Wikipedia to get background on subjects. These articles are now being used to support the disparaging edits and so it becomes fact when, in fact, it is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.233.208 ( talk) 18:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Someone has edited this article to say he died while setting up a television, as well as messing up the formatting and editing the article to say he's already signed with the LA Galaxy, a rumored transfer which has not yet been officially confirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.94.174.142 ( talk) 23:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note that the correct name spelling is Charlie Macdonell. I have corrected the content of the article, but cannot correct the title. Your primary source for this article (ESPN Cricinfo) has also spelt his name incorrectly. My name is Michael Macdonell - I am his father and am therefore uniquely-qualified to know his name!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.93.88 ( talk) 09:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Done I would think so. It's been moved to the correct spelling. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 10:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Under the section titled "Investigation and recovery", I made this edit and deleted this unsubstantiated claim:
"Mobley contacted police, explaining that she suspected she had been abducted."
A user undid this edit to make it appear as the original, which is this :
"Mobley contacted police, explaining that she suspected she had been abducted. A DNA sample taken from Mobley after she was born was matched to a swab taken from the potential match.[1]"
Here's is [1] article for reference :
Sanchez, Ray. "Newborn abducted from hospital found alive 18 years later, sheriff says". CNN. Retrieved 13 January 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/13/us/abducted-newborn-found-alive-18-years-later/index.html
This user who undeleted my edit :
02:21, 17 January 2017 Gourami Watcher
(date and time of their edit included).
He/she should not have undeleted the edit. All the article above, that "supposedly" supports this claim that "Mobley contacted police", says is that DNA was taken, not "how" it came to be that she gave it.
This user is being an "ass" by putting it back in when he/she can read it and see it's not in the article.
Hello,
This is my Wikipedia page and I am having trouble having adding my headshot from IMDB. I have full copyright to my photos. Is there a way that I can get the photo added?
/info/en/?search=Anthony_Jabre
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3712810/
Any advice you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Chelsea R (
talk •
contribs)
23:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Dean Shiels ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article about a Northern Irish footballer has recently been subject to editing by an SPA who repeatedly removes removes large quantities of information referenced to quite reliable sources, e.g BBC Sport, Irish Mirror, RTÉ, etc.) with the fake edit summary "typo". The editor in question, Dixaldinho ( talk · contribs), recently resorted to making this legal threat on the talk page of an editor who reverted their mass removals. Despite being urged to discuss the issues on Talk:Dean Shiels, they have simply attempted another mass removal. On the basis of WP:Don't overlook legal threats, could editors here take a look at what's going on. There may be legitimate reasons for removing some of the material which are not immediately apparent. Voceditenore ( talk) 14:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Update: a newly registered account Osgood1985 ( talk · contribs) has just removed the material again with the edit summary "The person (dean shiels) who's asked me to correct this information regarding personal inaccurate information". Voceditenore ( talk) 14:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed content created by user Tomwsulcer that was not neutral in its point of view or was unsourced. This is the diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Leonard_Lance&type=revision&diff=760939057&oldid=760934326
A local paper, the Mount Olive Chronicle, ran an editorial based on an interview with the subject of this page. It suggests that Tomwsucler's content is not only subjective opinion, and therefore questionable, but possibly even inaccurate. Here is the editorial: http://www.newjerseyhills.com/mt_olive_chronicle/news/reluctantly-lance-still-backing-trump-for-president/article_5c3b2155-74f3-5c8c-ac83-588d1f195710.html
The information I replaced Tomwsucler's partisan content with with was factual.
In less than an hour after I made the change, Tomwsucler reverted the page to the previous version, which was based on subjective opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northnj1994 ( talk • contribs) 23:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Is it appropriate that "murderer" is listed as an occupation for Claudine Longet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grizzopks ( talk • contribs) 18:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Not a lovely topic I know, but on this page people are adding Trump's name to the list of "notable" participants. The most recent reference added was this piece from Newsweek. The article states "The veracity of the report and its sourcing have not been verified." I know it's all over FB right now, but until there's some very solid evidence of this taking place, I strongly urge others to monitor this popping up on WP. APK whisper in my ear 08:16, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
I have been trying to keep the unproven, derogatory claims out of Wikipedia pages as clear BLP violations - even if we weasel around it by reporting what someone else says the dossier says. There have even been several uploads of the entire 35 page document into Wikipedia articles, which I have reverted. Now someone has created an article which spells out all the unproven derogatory stuff and includes the 35 page document; it is at Donald Trump Russia dossier. I have nominated it for AfD and I have requested that the deletion be speedy since IMO it is a gross BLP violation to include this stuff here. This is not a matter of whether someone likes or dislikes Trump; this is a matter of adherence to core Wikipedia policies. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
precisely because it is available all over the internet. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 21:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
We have the dossier, we have RS saying it is the dossier, we have Donny Tweeting about the dossier. I agree that we must be careful how we use it. It's contents must not be stated to be facts (so no including Donny on certain pages) but to exclude mentioning what Donny is accused of would make Wikipedia worthless as information about this subject.
Also what is it that is being objected to, the fact it contains unsubstantiated allegations? or the fact that the unsubstantiated allegations are unsubstantiated?. Slatersteven ( talk) 10:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think at this point we need to know what is being suggested, what do people support?
Note I know that number two maybe a bit broad, but you can still also vote elsewhere (and the at one is included just for completeness, I doubt anyone will vote for it. Slatersteven ( talk) 16:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Also I know this is not AFD, my purpose was to try and find out what people are actually talking about. Slatersteven ( talk) 19:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think we now have an idea about what we are discussing. I will collapse those options that clearly have zero support.
Slatersteven (
talk)
10:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I think this event (among countless others), show the need that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and there is no deadline to get content into WP. In a case like this, given how much BLP there is involved and that this is a story about the media itself (Buzzfeed among others), we absolutely should hold off on detailed coverage until we have better hindsight of the importance of this event. Editors on recent events are far too much in a rush to create articles or insert materials without considering that we have many other policies and aspects that weight heavier on content than having up-to-the-second content updates. -- MASEM ( t) 14:46, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Just my 2¢, but I think what we need is vigorous enforcement of policy and guidelines, even if it means being deletionist or bitey when it comes to the dossier and allegations. To me, this is one of the "act first, ask questions later". We can always undo a deletion or restore an edit. But we cannot undo BLP harms or allow them to linger due to bureaucracy, wikilawyering, or indifference. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Murder of Seth Rich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The BLP policy is being cited in this edit, but that BLP argument makes absolutely no sense to me. The removed material is longstanding, there's no consensus whatsoever to remove it, so the editor in question seems to be imagining some "conspiracy" that somehow triggers the BLP policy. More eyes requested, thanks. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 22:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
It would be refreshing some day in the future if editors who bring questions here for community discussion would start by presenting a balanced and reasonably complete summary of the issue.
We can start sorting this out as a community when all the facts and views are clearly and neutrally presented. I'll try some of that but not all, as it's a long story: A young man was murdered in the course of what the Washington DC police call a botched robbery attempt around 2 AM in an area of DC where there has been a recent spate of street crime. The victim was employed at the Democratic National Committee in DC. Shortly thereafter, out of the blue, Julian Assange of Wikileaks was being interviewed on European TV and stated to the amazement of his interviewer that Wikileaks would double the standard reward of the DC Police for information leading to the conviction of the killer(s). Assange then went on to make some crafty remarks about how Wikileaks protects its sources. According to RS coverage, this stoked conspiracy theories and what one account called "tinfoil hat" Reddit chatter about how the Clintons had plotted the crime. There is no evidence or any credible suggestion to link the crime to the victim's employment at the Democratic Committee. Subsequently, a Republican lobbyist and provocateur, host of a Newsmax podcast stated that he would offer an even larger cash reward, along the lines of Assange's. The statements of these two, unrelated to the crime, are being used (according to numerous RS) to insinuate the Clinton conspiracy theory into the narrative. In the process, they are suggesting that Mr. Rich betrayed his employer and possibly committed criminal acts sharing privileged DNC information with Assange. The stuff about the "rewards" -- assuming the grantors even have access to these amounts of cash -- has nothing to do with the topic of the article (the murder) and WP does not detail the statements of unrelated parties when they smear living or recently demised victims of crime. There is ample policy to support that, and the burden for inclusion cannot be demonstrated, hence this excursion to BLPN. SPECIFICO talk 23:13, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
If you were to ask yourselves "why does this article on a sad but routine crime exist" you'd be led, as if by magic, to the right actions. I won't hold my breath. Dan Murphy ( talk) 21:29, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
In the article Axel Bergstedt about my person is used much libelous tabloid jornalism. My children are suffering bullying in the school because of the articles in wikipedia in four languages. So I think, it should be the best to delete the article or to delete the harmful parts. As you can see, someone changed in november the portuguese wikipedia writing a hateful article, and hours later the articles in spain and english were changed, too. The articles are full of lies and mistakes. Still today there is no accusation against me. No website of mine were deleted, no picture were deleted. I am reporting about raped girls in some muslim countries, what they call "pedofilia", but still today google and microsoft didn´t delet any picture in my blogs. So it´s only for revange and hate that someone is writing such a libelous article about me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axel Bergstedt ( talk • contribs) 10:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Done I've copy-edited Axel Bergstedt and checked the sources. What is there now is well cited. The accusations of paedophilia have not yet been proven and anyway needs far more WP:RSs per WP:BLP, and anyway accusations should not be introduced until proven in court ( WP:BLPCRIME) so I have not reintroduced them — Iadmc ♫ talk 17:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Can someone help to make this living person's biography more neutral? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.60.49.198 ( talk) 06:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Bruce Nicholson This article is poorly written although it is not inaccurate. It also needs updating. I would rewrite the article as follows: Bruce Nicholson (born 1948) is a visual effects artist who has won 2 Academy Awards for The Empire Strikes Back (1980) and Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), and also nominated for Poltergeist (1982). Nicholson was born and raised in Los Angeles, CA and entered the film business in 1974 after attending film school at UCLA and Sherwood Oaks Film School. He was hired at ILM to work on the original Star Wars (1977) after working at a small optical effects facility, Ray Mercer & Co. He remained at ILM for 19 years, and then went on to work for Sony Imageworks, Digital Domain, Rhythm & Hues, and Tippett Studios as a Compositor and Visual Effects Supervisor on nearly 50 films. He currently teaches Visual Effects at Academy of Art University, and is actively engaged in independent filmmaking. Nicholson is married to the Set Decorator Gretchen Scharfenberg.
sources: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0629785/?ref_=nv_sr_1 https://admin.academyart.edu/myProfile?18
I can provide a picture, but don't see an attach icon. Please advise. Thanks, Bruce Nicholson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnichols6 ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
A lot more eyes and perhaps an admin may be needed. IPs are being persistent. We have an edit war going on at the article Linda Sarsour in which badly sourced claims are returning over and over due to a Reddit discussion, YouTube video and then a political blog. The information cannot be verified and is based entirely on a set of social media "tweets" that do not qualify as RS and do not support the inflammatory claims being made.-- Mark Miller ( talk) 07:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
(Please feel free to move this to any other more appropriate Noticeboard, COI, NPOV, etc.) I have tried to work along with the user (both at User talk:JoeLhota and User talk:Lindyharmony) to help him understand the conflict of interest in editing his own biography. At first I thought it was a fan for the use of phrases such as "Use Mr. Lhota's proper name, not his nickname." as an act of deference, when WP:COMMONNAME suggests the article say "Joe" everywhere except for the beginning of a BLP when we always give full names. I've incorporated quite a few of their requested changes, but have tried to draw the line a few times. E.g. the individual does not want to be called a politician, but that is unfair to the encyclopedia that someone who was a major candidate for one of the most high-profile positions in the US, Mayor of New York, not be listed as a politician, or as a compromise "former politician". The user also has been removing well-sourced data, quotes from interviews, and references left-and-right and adding things like LinkedIn profiles. I don't want to keep fighting this user and a few times let it sit for a day (the 17th and the 19th) in the hopes that another disinterested party would come along and take up the mantle. It seems for the most part the user is, perhaps in good faith, seeing this as "his page" which is why he is focused on refactoring it as more of a prose resume and less of a biography, so it will fit his image of how he wants to be presented rather than a neutral encyclopedia article. JesseRafe ( talk) 15:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
This article mixes up Abdul-Salam Hanafi, a Taliban governor from the 1990s, with Abdul-Salam Baryalai, the current Taliban Qunduz shadow governor. They are two different people. Hanafi sits on the Taliban political shura at Pakistan (see UN sanctions reports which are filed yearly), and Baryalai operates at Qunduz. Most of the information here pertains to Baryalai. Hi,
This article mixes up Abdul-Salam Hanafi, a Taliban governor from the 1990s, with Abdul-Salam Baryalai, the current Taliban Qunduz shadow governor. They are two different people. Hanafi sits on the Taliban political shura at Pakistan (see UN sanctions reports which are filed yearly), and Baryalai operates at Qunduz. Most of the information here pertains to Baryalai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:A21F:F435:2C9A:D1A9:DD7A:5F69 ( talk) 07:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Editor Gamerrx is continually (re-)inserting an unsourced addition to the list of notable trans men ( 1, 2, 3), despite being warned. Edit filter log activity suggests there may be a language difficulty. Funcrunch ( talk) 23:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Is reporting when a celebrity is dating another celebrity (or for that matter, non-celebrity) appropriate content for the Wikipedia articles for those individuals? I'm thinking no. I don't think a encyclopedia is the right place for such tabloid reporting. It's also something that's likely to become outdated and inaccurate.
I'm not talking about long-term non-marital relationships like the one between Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russel, which has gone on for decades and resulted in children. I'm talking about the kind of dating reporting that is usually reported on blogs and in tabloids.
The specific issue that raises this for me (although my interest is in general, not just these articles) is the reported dating relationship of singer BoA and actor Joo Won: "In January 2017, it was revealed that BoA had been dating actor Joo Won since mid-2016." Leaving the issue of whether PopCrush is a reliable source, is this appropriate Wikipedia coverage? TJRC ( talk) 00:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Note For the umpteenth time, "celebrity gossip" is intrinsically rumour, and is not encyclopedic, nor of any long-term value to readers and users of any encyclopedia. It is the bane of BLPs, and is a mine-field at best, and, in my lone opinion, should be excised utterly. Collect ( talk) 13:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the discussion. From the varied inputs here, it sounds like there is not a Wikipedia-wide consensus on whether to exclude the "who's dating who" information, provided it is reliably sourced; so I guess it's on an article-by-article basis. Although I don't think it belongs -- I do not view it as encyclopedic content -- I seem to be the only one seeking removal in the two articles I mention, so I'll step away from the issue there. TJRC ( talk) 00:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
The Awards and Nomination Section was accidentely removed durring Edit, Please Help Restore Nnaji's Award and Nomination Section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Britenydaniels ( talk • contribs) 20:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Person does not meet notability standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:282:500:965:E4B0:7F55:264F:AB2 ( talk) 06:30, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
My participation in this conversation was initiated by an OTRS ticket ( VRTS ticket # 2016072910017261), I am not a frequent enwiki editor and am not overly familiar with policy here.
The subject of the article feels that the page is being used to attack him with unsupported claims. I tend to agree, the person or people who are adding accusations of impropriety are using a single blog post (which appears to be the only post on the blog) as support. There has been quite a lot of discussion on the talk page about whether or not this blog post is a valid source, I contend that it is not. I would appreciate it if editors who are familiar with Wikipedia policies around BLP and verifiability could take a look at the article, the talk page conversation and the blog post itself and take whatever action is appropriate. - TheDaveRoss ( talk) 15:26, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Abu Dhar Azzam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article is mainly sourced using primary sources from jihadist and terrorist websites, videos and documents; not very verifiable or reliable sources in my opinion. CentreLeftRight ✉ 05:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
The article " Nauman Niaz" is an autobiography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tala hayat ( talk • contribs) 19:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
David Robertson (footballer, born 1986) and David Goodwillie were found in a civil case to have committed rape.
Could someone establish the proper way to describe and flag this in the article. Some people seem to downplay it as 'personal life'.
Media coverage is rather different. [11]
is there a balance between blp and minimising sexual assault/rape vis a vis the victims of said rapes? Sumbuddi ( talk) 17:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Also I feel that given that this case has apparently ended the career of both men, then the incident belongs in the introduction. Sumbuddi ( talk) 18:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
This page has a section on "Controversies" which detail what appear to be two minor issues between a university president and two students. Neither have reliable sources to back them up (one is linked to a 404, the other a blog), the language is far from neutral (esp the section about Marc Kelly which gives this person's personal POV with no source), and I believe both should be removed. I am still a new editor and didn't feel confident removing it altogether, so I am looking for other editors for their input. (NOTE: I see that these issues were raised years ago in the TALK section of the page, but not resolved). Thanks. Aphra ( talk) 19:05, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Done--The unwarranted parts were removed.On reinstation, talk page discussion is the best way out. Winged Blades Godric 14:36, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
The biography Hoodrich Pablo Juan was tagged for AFD deletion, but should have been a speedy delete (G12) as it is entirely a cut-and-paste from this source. Thank you. Magnolia677 ( talk) 15:10, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Joplinplayer has three times ( [20], [21], [22]) inserted unsourced sensationalistic, inflammatory, and potentially libelous material to this article. Although there is a source at the end of the paragraph where the material was inserted, it in no way supports the questionable text. I have deleted the text once. It's unclear, but given Joplinplayer's assertions here, it may be an eyewitness account. Does the statement in question belong in the article? I don't want to get into an edit war with Joplinplayer, so I'm looking for some oversight here. 32.218.152.233 ( talk) 15:37, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
There's a deletion discussion about Infobox person/Wikidata that could affect BLPs, in case anyone here is interested. SarahSV (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Russell Brothers is a draft article I have written, still in my sandbox. I am posting here to ask advice about it. Below is a communication I sent to a more senior editor, Fuhghettaboutit, and the response I received: ---- Eagledj ( talk) 17:29, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm working on an article about a prominent Nashville businessman who turned into a major cocaine smuggler (as in Breaking Bad), Russell Brothers. It is a fascinating story but I have had second thoughts about it because the subject is still alive and due to be released from prison in December of 2016. Even though his name and exploits have been on the front pages of many newspapers in Tennessee and elsewhere, something about this gives me pause. He still has an opportunity to live some more years. I'm sure he will eventually be on Wikipedia, but I'm inclined to hold the article for a while, maybe even until his death — he is 78 now. He reportedly enjoys his bad boy image. Anyway, please take a look. Your thoughts ?
Regards as always, Eagledj ( talk) 17:40, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Mike Renzi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have been attempting to explain to an editor that material based on personal interviews and knowledge cannot be added to this article unless it is also supported by independent reliable sources. Now looking over the article it appears largely to be overly promotional and extremely poorly sourced. I would appreciate it enormously if other editors with an understanding of our policies regarding living persons could take a look and help bring it at least somewhat in line with WP:BLP/ WP:RS requirements.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Leonard Lance ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is a discussion at Talk:Leonard Lance as to whether particular text is supported by sources or an original interpretation of them. Editors are invited to discuss either here or there. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 21:04, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
See Alexandra Savior. I reverted her publicists changes and restored her real name which is in several media profiles of her. Now I wonder. If I did the wrong thing you can undo and hide the name again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B11C:899D:156C:E53:AB15:BE48 ( talk) 21:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I just walked into an article about Dr. Oz and there's some discussion about whether or not we should include the statement "Psuedoscience promoter" or not in the lead. You opinion is being sought to gain a consensus one way or another. My argument on keeping it out is very much a WP:BLP argument. ƘƟ SĦ 21:32, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Tom Brady ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
RfC about deflategate in the lede or not going on now. -- Malerooster ( talk) 19:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
This entire article is hyperbolic beyond belief, and uses youtube, facebook, Huffington Post, and some left-wing activist group as primary sources, which seems to be heavily POV.
Also, Despite his attempt at gaining fame, I just don't think this bloke is notable enough to be included on wiki, and definitely not the way his bio was written.
Stevo D ( talk) 20:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=David_Bradish This page is a vanity living persons biography. The page is an orphan and pretty much all the material is unattributed, aside from links to the individuals personal website. Seems to be mostly POV. I don't think he has done anything that deserves a wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.236.248 ( talk • contribs)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
These two bio pages contain questionable and non-reliable references which question the neutrality of the pages. I tried several times to tag the articles but User:Justice007 keep reverting my tags and accusing me for being personally against the subjects of articles. Rather than going into edit warring I prefer to leave that matter to other editors. Please look into this. -- Saqib ( talk) 07:13, 7 January 2017 (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.
William "Wild Bill" Wykpisz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This page is a joke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.90.211.9 ( talk) 21:32, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
This mentions a student with no article who evidently shouted at someone and an associate professor, again with no article, although this story did gain more traction. However the Guth comment if kept should have more context. [1] [2] Doug Weller talk 15:39, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Otabek Mahkamov ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) seems to have some serious claims added last April. As the sources are in Uzbek and not English, I am not sure of their validity. Needs to be checked by someone with skills in Uzbek. Two sources are 404, one source is a scanned letter on Google drive.
The accessdate is not the date the ref was added. This diff appears to be where much of the information has been added. Several attempts have been made to remove with no comment. It appears to have been replaced. I undid a few removals via Huggle and got this message w/ contact info on my talk page which was later deleted by the same IP: diff No idea how to proceed here. So, I added this ticket. Jim1138 ( talk) 08:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
To whom this may concern,
The article headlined Rachael Maza Long Is incorrectly labeled. I am writing on behalf of my mother who this article is written about. She has been divorced for some years now and her name is now "Rachael Zoa Maza" or just "Rachael Maza". Her last name is no longer "Long". If this could be changed that would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Ariel Maza Long — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariel Maza Long ( talk • contribs)
Simon Howard ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am the subject of this article. I am not very familiar with editing Wikipedia, and while I have read the policies on editing, editing articles where you are the subject, and biographies of living persons, I am not quite sure where I stand on some of my concerns about this article about me. My concerns are broadly in three parts.
Firstly: I am not a particularly well-known public health figure, and not sure that I am sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia page. Similarly, some of the work cited in the page is not at all noteworthy (e.g. presentation given to a small group at Cumberland Lodge, or poster on invasive group A strep presented at a conference).
Secondly: The tone of the page does not appear balanced, but appears to be constructed to portray me in a negative light. For example, copy in the page editorialises beyond quotes (e.g. "Howard has also criticised investment in cycling facilities as an anti-obesity intervention" and "Howard has claimed that there is an association between suicide and the use of social media", neither of which is supported by the quotations and sources cited). Authorship of some sources is attributed disproportionately to me, even when I was not the lead author of the work in question (e.g. "Simon Howard et al, Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer"). To be in a list of acknowledgements in the book The Drugs Don't Work hardly merits a description as a 'contributor' to the work, which implies authorship.
Thirdly: There are many factual errors in this page. I am not an academic. My editorship of the CMO report was certainly not "only the second time someone other than the Chief Medical Officer of the day has edited the statutory Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer". I am not cited as a contributor to all of Dame Professor Sally Davies's other annual reports. My blog (which is still active!) is referred to in the past tense - and I am not aware of anyone 'citing' the discussion on the blog's comments section about aborted foetuses (and no source is provided for this claim). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjhoward ( talk • contribs) 19:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Jani Kadiyatu Jallah Kollie ( talk · contribs · count) is trying to maintain a promotional version of C. Cyvette M. Gibson. The subject is a living, currently-active politician in Liberia. I tried to engage on the talk page and provided warning about the BLP discretionary sanctions on their user talk. Regardless, Jani Kadiyatu Jallah Kollie has reverted me twice today here and here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 16:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
There is a question on the talk page of this article regarding the sources used in the Partial list of television appearances section, and some discussion on the matter on the article talk page. John Carter ( talk) 20:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Recently subject to a large amount of vandalism, I have stubbed this page because of the unsourced claims of violence and murder against members of this sect. There are indeed some sources, but the existing article effectively blamed one person for the murder of one person and violence against others. There may well be reliable sources for the claims that this was the case; if anyone is more familiar with the case I would urge them to add them in. Otherwise the article as it stands cannot claim as such. Black Kite (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
An economist called David Malpass is apparently unfortunate enough to have one WP:SPA adding WP:SYNTH negative implications about him in the Wikipedia article about him, and another SPA removing them again. More eyes would be useful, especially because the negative one recently reached autoconfirmed if I understand the rules correctly. Many thanks. (One of the SPAs posted here on this noticeboard before, but there was no response.) MPS1992 ( talk) 20:52, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
A triple play. All three are puff pieces, apparently written by the public relations department at CAA Sports. Thoughts and assistance cleaning these up are welcome. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:48, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Depuffed. Collect ( talk) 21:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Jacob Barnett ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have a question at RSN that crosses multiple policy issues. The question is at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Jacob Barnett, and it is about whether a dead YouTube URL is a reliable source for a previously published video of a kid now being unavailable. (It's possible that this source is unreliable but that the content will remain because the others might be, but I specifically want to know whether this one source is reliable for this claim about a BLP.) Please consider looking at this request. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 18:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
User:WhatamIdoing, no one claimed that the dead link verified anything in itself, and you damn well know it. It has been explained to you by two different editors. Sławomir Biały ( talk) 02:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I posted a concern on the talk page of Vonda Phelps after @ Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): claimed to have contacted a relative of the individual to supply birth and death information and bolstered it with primary sources. While I assume good faith and don’t doubt that this is true, I’m concerned that it runs afoul of WP:V for reasons listed on the talk page. Since the user who added the material originally disagrees, I thought I would bring it up here to get a third opinion (I consider it a BLP issue because, as noted on the talk page, there’s no ‘’verifiable’’ evidence that she is deceased, even though it was likely, thus why she was in the possibly living people category previously). If consensus is that the new information is fine to include, then I’m happy to withdraw my challenge. Canadian Paul 19:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
The article was recently deleted via G11 by editor DGG. I believe this was not a correct invoking of the G11 policy. I'd argue that the article was written in a mostly neutral point of view, which you can examine from this archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20151128223554//info/en/?search=Kevin_Pho
It's also a problematic deletion because the subject passes GNG quite easily. Although, the sources in the article were pretty sparse, there are many available:
And many more...
Medicalreporter ( talk) 13:38, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Non-urgent: I don't think there's an edit war going on that I can see, so maybe here is not the right place to note it - just a jumble of dubiously sourced promotion for a Brazilian yogi. Would benefit experienced BLP editors to trim and de-peacock. In ictu oculi ( talk) 22:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
This article has had problems with highly promotional, WP:SPA editing since it's creation that hasn't let up. Krainak ( talk · contribs) has responded to my concerns, and I think this is a good time to get others involved. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
About content of the movie From Beginning to End and biographies of Brazilian protagonists Rafael Cardoso and Joao Gabriel Vasconselos[edit source]
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT NOTICE
The movie from Beginning to End HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH INCEST OR HOMOSEXUALITY, as mentioned in the biography of Brazilian protagonist Rafael Cardoso. This movie is a COMPLETE ALLEGORY and a portrait of the healthy integrated person and their development. The brothers represent different sides of the same person. The water, omnipresent throughout the movie, represents the subconscious, where the Self swims and emerges from. The scene in the movie where they undress in the white room (representing the psycho-mental interior) represent the stage where the person integrates intimate Truths about her/himself to create continuity of the Self.(1) The scene where they explain why they love each other is how a person with a healthy self esteem relates to themselves. The Mother represents the Higher Self, who is completely non-judgemental and guides the person with solutions(cures) about everything. The man who comes to warn the mother about the sexual aspect of the boy's relationship is what we call the Devil, he comes to create disharmony and problems because he is very jealous, he can not integrate-he can not stand up to his responsibilities. The movie has a happy ending, because the future for a healthy person can only be bright, loving and full of happiness.
(1) See The Living Book of Nature. by Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov,Chapter 7-The Naked Truth
Eleutherius1 ( talk) 08:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed a claim that this person "developed" Sesame Street since I have been unable to find a reliable source for that other than his own promotional materials. The article has many other problems, possibly including the fact that he is called a "sex criminal" at the beginning. Yes, he was convicted of three sexually related misdemeanors in 1982, and was sentenced to nine months in jail. My concern is that the article may devote undue weight to those misdemeanors from 35 years ago, without providing explanation or context. I would appreciate the opinions of other editors. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
THE INFORMATION ON DIANNE HOUSTON'S LIFE AND CAREER IS FALSE AND MISLEADING. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:91CB:4D00:79A1:F3A8:6209:4E9F ( talk) 07:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Can someone please help me make a page. I'm not that versed in how to do that. My page is up for deletion after many tabloid rumor postings. I guess I'd rather have it deleted than have tabloid lies up about me but I would prefer to have my work speak for its self. Here are a few articles I found and IMDB has a list of most of my credits. Any and all help would be appreciated. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0741672/publicity?ref_=nm_pdt_pub_sm Thank you, Sherrie Rose — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.40.165.65 ( talk) 18:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think the article Gregor Wenning should be removed. It contains information which are of no interest for the reader. For instance: "was born on 21 March 1964 to Karl-Heinz Wenning, a school teacher, and Elisabeth Wenning (née Terwort), a secretary. One of his brothers is the German church musician and composer Martin Wenning." or "In 1995, he married neurologist Roberta Granata-Wenning; they have two sons (Maximilian and Marco)". Such kind of information is simply ridiculous. Prof. Wenning is neither Freud nor Charcot. He is Authors of several scientific papers. However there are hundreds if not thousands of neurologists who published more outstanding studies without necessarily having been the subject of a Wikipedia article. Clearly, this page was written as an act of self promotion, is of very little (if any) utility to the general reader and, as such, should be removed. Quixote12 ( talk) 11:32, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I think I listed this article here before, but it did not receive any attention. The subject is no doubt notable, but the article is part CV and part hagiography. There are not one but two galleries of images, and other lists of information that I believe do not belong in a biography, such as the masters theses he has supervised. I would like a second opinion before I start paring it down. AtHomeIn神戸 ( talk) 02:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Rael Levitt is a South African auctioneer who had a dispute over an auctioned property. The dispute was well covered in the media and Levitt was accused of various wrongful acts (fraud / auction rigging / etc). In several court cases that followed, Levitt was found NOT GUILTY of all charges laid against him and was acquitted of all allegations. His Wikipedia page edited by Bbb23 makes fabricated references to tabloid TV programs which painted Levitt in a negative light and references articles written by Fiona Forde (a tabloid journalist) in the main body of his Wikipedia page. This version of the page has been constructed in breach of Wikipedia's Biograohy of Living Persons Policy. It is advanced that Levitt's page should read like this:
In 2012, a dispute arose over a property that Rael Levitt brought to public auction. [1] The dispute was covered extensively in the media and Levitt stepped down as CEO of Auction Alliance and as a member of the national auction association. [2] In a series of court cases that followed, Levitt was vindicated of the fraud charges laid against him. [3] Various local and provincial divisions of South African courts held that Levitt was not guilty of fraud. [4]
In contrast, Bbb23 has written his page:
In 2012, Levitt stepped down as CEO of Auction Alliance and as a member of the national auction association.[13][14] The National Consumer Commission found that Rael Levitt had transgressed South Africa’s new Consumer Protection Act and issued a compliance notice in favour of Wendy Appelbaum[15] The ruling was overturned by the National Consumer Tribunal on 11 July 2012. Levitt won a number of cases against the Consumer Commission and the Estate Agency Affairs Board.[16] In 2012 the investigative TV programme Carte Blanche twice featured Rael Levitt. In the first part, Levitt was seen driving away at speed out of the garage of the Auction Alliance offices in Johannesburg after being told that they were there to interview him. In a follow up segment a few months later, a voice on an intercom at his apartment building allegedly changed to an African accent when told that they wanted to interview him.[17] On 23 June 2012 Wendy Appelbaum laid an attempted fraud charge against Rael Levitt. In August 2012, Levitt's apartment and Auction Alliance offices around South Africa were raided by the South African Police's Hawks crime unit [18] In April 2015, Levitt and Auction Alliance lost their battle at the South African Constitutional Court over the search warrants used to seize documents and the hard drives. The Court ordered that Levitt and Auction Alliance bear the legal costs.[19] The dismissal of the legal challenge to the search warrants has now allowed the police investigation of alleged fraud and money laundering by Auction Alliance and Levitt to proceed. The South African police conducted an investigation into fraud and money laundering as well as all auctions Levitt and Auction Alliance handled between January 2003 and February 2012.[20] On 13 May 2016 Fiona Forde wrote another 7-day media series that published an investigative report on alleged suspicious activities at the company that she alleged had been commissioned by the Auction Alliance Board in March 2012. Levitt and Auction Alliance lost a court bid to prevent the publication of the report.[21]
References
( David Ricksonberg ( talk) 08:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC))
Víctor M. Marroquín ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Would it be possible to get some more experienced BLP editors to watch Víctor M. Marroquín? There has been some IPs editing and a claim was made that they might be doing so for personal reasons. I first came across the article via this Teahouse post, but am not sure whether this is a "notability" problem or something which can be cleaned up. The IP who made the above has also been removing maintenance templates without explanation or addressing the issues. I've encouraged them to use the talk page or discuss their concerns here, but not sure if they will. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 01:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Nolan Crouse ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
there are repeatedly derogatory comments being posted about me
I am Nolan Crouse and someone continues to post incorrect and derogatory comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.243.32 ( talk) 01:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Note that sources are being used for claims not made in those sources, and that I am barred from doing a damn thing about it. Collect ( talk) 17:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Date of birth is wrong by 5 years.
Steve Byers was born in 1974. I attended school with him for several years (all of high school) and can assure you he was in my grade.
He was actually older than me by almost a year as I had skipped a grade in elementary school.
I am also fairly certain he was not born on New Year's Eve. That would be a detail that nobody would forget.
You can confirm this information by obtaining a copy of "The Howl", Unionville High School's year book. You will find Byers in the class of 1993.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.197.160.45 ( talk) 19:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I am appealing for an editor to review the intro section to the Dan Wagner page which has been repeatedly vandalised by a particular user using multiple pseudonyms. The intro was altered originally in 2014 having been accurate for more than a decade prior, the edits have materially misrepresented the subjects' achievements. In particular, as can be seen clearly by the body of the page which describes the numerous business' set up by the subject (of which two became market leaders and sold for in excess of multiple billions of dollars), the intro centres on the drop in share price for one of the companies (during the dot com crash - which affected 99% of all tech companies in the world) and another of the many companies founded by the subject which went into administration (the only one that did so in fact).
According to 'WayBackMachine' the intro to the page read as follows between 2000 and 2014: "Dan Wagner (born 28 July 1963) is an English entrepreneur and businessman. He was one of the first British-based Internet entrepreneurs, having founded M.A.I.D (Marketing Analysis & Information Database) in 1984, a company which provided online information services. It made over 200,000 publications available from 192 countries. He was educated at Merchant Taylors' School, Northwood and University College School, London. After briefly joining Richer Sounds as a salesman he went to work for WCRS advertising in 1981. In 1984, Wagner founded MAID (Market Analysis and Information Database) which was one of the first online information repositories and Wagner as CEO was responsible for its development and growth, building it from zero to 26% of the global on-line information market."
In 2014 and subsequently, User:Ol King Col (and the same user under the guise User:185.145.156.53) has made numerous disparaging edits to the page which have been subsequently undone and re-worded by numerous other wiki contributors but often resulting in an edit war. The impact of Wikipedia cannot be understated and these edits have now been referenced as factual by various lazy media outlets who use Wikipedia to get background on subjects. These articles are now being used to support the disparaging edits and so it becomes fact when, in fact, it is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.233.208 ( talk) 18:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Someone has edited this article to say he died while setting up a television, as well as messing up the formatting and editing the article to say he's already signed with the LA Galaxy, a rumored transfer which has not yet been officially confirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.94.174.142 ( talk) 23:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Please note that the correct name spelling is Charlie Macdonell. I have corrected the content of the article, but cannot correct the title. Your primary source for this article (ESPN Cricinfo) has also spelt his name incorrectly. My name is Michael Macdonell - I am his father and am therefore uniquely-qualified to know his name!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.93.88 ( talk) 09:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Done I would think so. It's been moved to the correct spelling. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 10:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Under the section titled "Investigation and recovery", I made this edit and deleted this unsubstantiated claim:
"Mobley contacted police, explaining that she suspected she had been abducted."
A user undid this edit to make it appear as the original, which is this :
"Mobley contacted police, explaining that she suspected she had been abducted. A DNA sample taken from Mobley after she was born was matched to a swab taken from the potential match.[1]"
Here's is [1] article for reference :
Sanchez, Ray. "Newborn abducted from hospital found alive 18 years later, sheriff says". CNN. Retrieved 13 January 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/13/us/abducted-newborn-found-alive-18-years-later/index.html
This user who undeleted my edit :
02:21, 17 January 2017 Gourami Watcher
(date and time of their edit included).
He/she should not have undeleted the edit. All the article above, that "supposedly" supports this claim that "Mobley contacted police", says is that DNA was taken, not "how" it came to be that she gave it.
This user is being an "ass" by putting it back in when he/she can read it and see it's not in the article.
Hello,
This is my Wikipedia page and I am having trouble having adding my headshot from IMDB. I have full copyright to my photos. Is there a way that I can get the photo added?
/info/en/?search=Anthony_Jabre
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3712810/
Any advice you can give me would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Chelsea R (
talk •
contribs)
23:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Dean Shiels ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article about a Northern Irish footballer has recently been subject to editing by an SPA who repeatedly removes removes large quantities of information referenced to quite reliable sources, e.g BBC Sport, Irish Mirror, RTÉ, etc.) with the fake edit summary "typo". The editor in question, Dixaldinho ( talk · contribs), recently resorted to making this legal threat on the talk page of an editor who reverted their mass removals. Despite being urged to discuss the issues on Talk:Dean Shiels, they have simply attempted another mass removal. On the basis of WP:Don't overlook legal threats, could editors here take a look at what's going on. There may be legitimate reasons for removing some of the material which are not immediately apparent. Voceditenore ( talk) 14:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Update: a newly registered account Osgood1985 ( talk · contribs) has just removed the material again with the edit summary "The person (dean shiels) who's asked me to correct this information regarding personal inaccurate information". Voceditenore ( talk) 14:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed content created by user Tomwsulcer that was not neutral in its point of view or was unsourced. This is the diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Leonard_Lance&type=revision&diff=760939057&oldid=760934326
A local paper, the Mount Olive Chronicle, ran an editorial based on an interview with the subject of this page. It suggests that Tomwsucler's content is not only subjective opinion, and therefore questionable, but possibly even inaccurate. Here is the editorial: http://www.newjerseyhills.com/mt_olive_chronicle/news/reluctantly-lance-still-backing-trump-for-president/article_5c3b2155-74f3-5c8c-ac83-588d1f195710.html
The information I replaced Tomwsucler's partisan content with with was factual.
In less than an hour after I made the change, Tomwsucler reverted the page to the previous version, which was based on subjective opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Northnj1994 ( talk • contribs) 23:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Is it appropriate that "murderer" is listed as an occupation for Claudine Longet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grizzopks ( talk • contribs) 18:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Not a lovely topic I know, but on this page people are adding Trump's name to the list of "notable" participants. The most recent reference added was this piece from Newsweek. The article states "The veracity of the report and its sourcing have not been verified." I know it's all over FB right now, but until there's some very solid evidence of this taking place, I strongly urge others to monitor this popping up on WP. APK whisper in my ear 08:16, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
I have been trying to keep the unproven, derogatory claims out of Wikipedia pages as clear BLP violations - even if we weasel around it by reporting what someone else says the dossier says. There have even been several uploads of the entire 35 page document into Wikipedia articles, which I have reverted. Now someone has created an article which spells out all the unproven derogatory stuff and includes the 35 page document; it is at Donald Trump Russia dossier. I have nominated it for AfD and I have requested that the deletion be speedy since IMO it is a gross BLP violation to include this stuff here. This is not a matter of whether someone likes or dislikes Trump; this is a matter of adherence to core Wikipedia policies. -- MelanieN ( talk) 19:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
precisely because it is available all over the internet. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 21:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
We have the dossier, we have RS saying it is the dossier, we have Donny Tweeting about the dossier. I agree that we must be careful how we use it. It's contents must not be stated to be facts (so no including Donny on certain pages) but to exclude mentioning what Donny is accused of would make Wikipedia worthless as information about this subject.
Also what is it that is being objected to, the fact it contains unsubstantiated allegations? or the fact that the unsubstantiated allegations are unsubstantiated?. Slatersteven ( talk) 10:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think at this point we need to know what is being suggested, what do people support?
Note I know that number two maybe a bit broad, but you can still also vote elsewhere (and the at one is included just for completeness, I doubt anyone will vote for it. Slatersteven ( talk) 16:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Also I know this is not AFD, my purpose was to try and find out what people are actually talking about. Slatersteven ( talk) 19:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I think we now have an idea about what we are discussing. I will collapse those options that clearly have zero support.
Slatersteven (
talk)
10:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I think this event (among countless others), show the need that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and there is no deadline to get content into WP. In a case like this, given how much BLP there is involved and that this is a story about the media itself (Buzzfeed among others), we absolutely should hold off on detailed coverage until we have better hindsight of the importance of this event. Editors on recent events are far too much in a rush to create articles or insert materials without considering that we have many other policies and aspects that weight heavier on content than having up-to-the-second content updates. -- MASEM ( t) 14:46, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Just my 2¢, but I think what we need is vigorous enforcement of policy and guidelines, even if it means being deletionist or bitey when it comes to the dossier and allegations. To me, this is one of the "act first, ask questions later". We can always undo a deletion or restore an edit. But we cannot undo BLP harms or allow them to linger due to bureaucracy, wikilawyering, or indifference. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Murder of Seth Rich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The BLP policy is being cited in this edit, but that BLP argument makes absolutely no sense to me. The removed material is longstanding, there's no consensus whatsoever to remove it, so the editor in question seems to be imagining some "conspiracy" that somehow triggers the BLP policy. More eyes requested, thanks. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 22:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
It would be refreshing some day in the future if editors who bring questions here for community discussion would start by presenting a balanced and reasonably complete summary of the issue.
We can start sorting this out as a community when all the facts and views are clearly and neutrally presented. I'll try some of that but not all, as it's a long story: A young man was murdered in the course of what the Washington DC police call a botched robbery attempt around 2 AM in an area of DC where there has been a recent spate of street crime. The victim was employed at the Democratic National Committee in DC. Shortly thereafter, out of the blue, Julian Assange of Wikileaks was being interviewed on European TV and stated to the amazement of his interviewer that Wikileaks would double the standard reward of the DC Police for information leading to the conviction of the killer(s). Assange then went on to make some crafty remarks about how Wikileaks protects its sources. According to RS coverage, this stoked conspiracy theories and what one account called "tinfoil hat" Reddit chatter about how the Clintons had plotted the crime. There is no evidence or any credible suggestion to link the crime to the victim's employment at the Democratic Committee. Subsequently, a Republican lobbyist and provocateur, host of a Newsmax podcast stated that he would offer an even larger cash reward, along the lines of Assange's. The statements of these two, unrelated to the crime, are being used (according to numerous RS) to insinuate the Clinton conspiracy theory into the narrative. In the process, they are suggesting that Mr. Rich betrayed his employer and possibly committed criminal acts sharing privileged DNC information with Assange. The stuff about the "rewards" -- assuming the grantors even have access to these amounts of cash -- has nothing to do with the topic of the article (the murder) and WP does not detail the statements of unrelated parties when they smear living or recently demised victims of crime. There is ample policy to support that, and the burden for inclusion cannot be demonstrated, hence this excursion to BLPN. SPECIFICO talk 23:13, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
If you were to ask yourselves "why does this article on a sad but routine crime exist" you'd be led, as if by magic, to the right actions. I won't hold my breath. Dan Murphy ( talk) 21:29, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
In the article Axel Bergstedt about my person is used much libelous tabloid jornalism. My children are suffering bullying in the school because of the articles in wikipedia in four languages. So I think, it should be the best to delete the article or to delete the harmful parts. As you can see, someone changed in november the portuguese wikipedia writing a hateful article, and hours later the articles in spain and english were changed, too. The articles are full of lies and mistakes. Still today there is no accusation against me. No website of mine were deleted, no picture were deleted. I am reporting about raped girls in some muslim countries, what they call "pedofilia", but still today google and microsoft didn´t delet any picture in my blogs. So it´s only for revange and hate that someone is writing such a libelous article about me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axel Bergstedt ( talk • contribs) 10:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Done I've copy-edited Axel Bergstedt and checked the sources. What is there now is well cited. The accusations of paedophilia have not yet been proven and anyway needs far more WP:RSs per WP:BLP, and anyway accusations should not be introduced until proven in court ( WP:BLPCRIME) so I have not reintroduced them — Iadmc ♫ talk 17:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Can someone help to make this living person's biography more neutral? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.60.49.198 ( talk) 06:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Bruce Nicholson This article is poorly written although it is not inaccurate. It also needs updating. I would rewrite the article as follows: Bruce Nicholson (born 1948) is a visual effects artist who has won 2 Academy Awards for The Empire Strikes Back (1980) and Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), and also nominated for Poltergeist (1982). Nicholson was born and raised in Los Angeles, CA and entered the film business in 1974 after attending film school at UCLA and Sherwood Oaks Film School. He was hired at ILM to work on the original Star Wars (1977) after working at a small optical effects facility, Ray Mercer & Co. He remained at ILM for 19 years, and then went on to work for Sony Imageworks, Digital Domain, Rhythm & Hues, and Tippett Studios as a Compositor and Visual Effects Supervisor on nearly 50 films. He currently teaches Visual Effects at Academy of Art University, and is actively engaged in independent filmmaking. Nicholson is married to the Set Decorator Gretchen Scharfenberg.
sources: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0629785/?ref_=nv_sr_1 https://admin.academyart.edu/myProfile?18
I can provide a picture, but don't see an attach icon. Please advise. Thanks, Bruce Nicholson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnichols6 ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
A lot more eyes and perhaps an admin may be needed. IPs are being persistent. We have an edit war going on at the article Linda Sarsour in which badly sourced claims are returning over and over due to a Reddit discussion, YouTube video and then a political blog. The information cannot be verified and is based entirely on a set of social media "tweets" that do not qualify as RS and do not support the inflammatory claims being made.-- Mark Miller ( talk) 07:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
(Please feel free to move this to any other more appropriate Noticeboard, COI, NPOV, etc.) I have tried to work along with the user (both at User talk:JoeLhota and User talk:Lindyharmony) to help him understand the conflict of interest in editing his own biography. At first I thought it was a fan for the use of phrases such as "Use Mr. Lhota's proper name, not his nickname." as an act of deference, when WP:COMMONNAME suggests the article say "Joe" everywhere except for the beginning of a BLP when we always give full names. I've incorporated quite a few of their requested changes, but have tried to draw the line a few times. E.g. the individual does not want to be called a politician, but that is unfair to the encyclopedia that someone who was a major candidate for one of the most high-profile positions in the US, Mayor of New York, not be listed as a politician, or as a compromise "former politician". The user also has been removing well-sourced data, quotes from interviews, and references left-and-right and adding things like LinkedIn profiles. I don't want to keep fighting this user and a few times let it sit for a day (the 17th and the 19th) in the hopes that another disinterested party would come along and take up the mantle. It seems for the most part the user is, perhaps in good faith, seeing this as "his page" which is why he is focused on refactoring it as more of a prose resume and less of a biography, so it will fit his image of how he wants to be presented rather than a neutral encyclopedia article. JesseRafe ( talk) 15:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
This article mixes up Abdul-Salam Hanafi, a Taliban governor from the 1990s, with Abdul-Salam Baryalai, the current Taliban Qunduz shadow governor. They are two different people. Hanafi sits on the Taliban political shura at Pakistan (see UN sanctions reports which are filed yearly), and Baryalai operates at Qunduz. Most of the information here pertains to Baryalai. Hi,
This article mixes up Abdul-Salam Hanafi, a Taliban governor from the 1990s, with Abdul-Salam Baryalai, the current Taliban Qunduz shadow governor. They are two different people. Hanafi sits on the Taliban political shura at Pakistan (see UN sanctions reports which are filed yearly), and Baryalai operates at Qunduz. Most of the information here pertains to Baryalai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:A21F:F435:2C9A:D1A9:DD7A:5F69 ( talk) 07:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Editor Gamerrx is continually (re-)inserting an unsourced addition to the list of notable trans men ( 1, 2, 3), despite being warned. Edit filter log activity suggests there may be a language difficulty. Funcrunch ( talk) 23:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Is reporting when a celebrity is dating another celebrity (or for that matter, non-celebrity) appropriate content for the Wikipedia articles for those individuals? I'm thinking no. I don't think a encyclopedia is the right place for such tabloid reporting. It's also something that's likely to become outdated and inaccurate.
I'm not talking about long-term non-marital relationships like the one between Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russel, which has gone on for decades and resulted in children. I'm talking about the kind of dating reporting that is usually reported on blogs and in tabloids.
The specific issue that raises this for me (although my interest is in general, not just these articles) is the reported dating relationship of singer BoA and actor Joo Won: "In January 2017, it was revealed that BoA had been dating actor Joo Won since mid-2016." Leaving the issue of whether PopCrush is a reliable source, is this appropriate Wikipedia coverage? TJRC ( talk) 00:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Note For the umpteenth time, "celebrity gossip" is intrinsically rumour, and is not encyclopedic, nor of any long-term value to readers and users of any encyclopedia. It is the bane of BLPs, and is a mine-field at best, and, in my lone opinion, should be excised utterly. Collect ( talk) 13:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the discussion. From the varied inputs here, it sounds like there is not a Wikipedia-wide consensus on whether to exclude the "who's dating who" information, provided it is reliably sourced; so I guess it's on an article-by-article basis. Although I don't think it belongs -- I do not view it as encyclopedic content -- I seem to be the only one seeking removal in the two articles I mention, so I'll step away from the issue there. TJRC ( talk) 00:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
The Awards and Nomination Section was accidentely removed durring Edit, Please Help Restore Nnaji's Award and Nomination Section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Britenydaniels ( talk • contribs) 20:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Person does not meet notability standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:282:500:965:E4B0:7F55:264F:AB2 ( talk) 06:30, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
My participation in this conversation was initiated by an OTRS ticket ( VRTS ticket # 2016072910017261), I am not a frequent enwiki editor and am not overly familiar with policy here.
The subject of the article feels that the page is being used to attack him with unsupported claims. I tend to agree, the person or people who are adding accusations of impropriety are using a single blog post (which appears to be the only post on the blog) as support. There has been quite a lot of discussion on the talk page about whether or not this blog post is a valid source, I contend that it is not. I would appreciate it if editors who are familiar with Wikipedia policies around BLP and verifiability could take a look at the article, the talk page conversation and the blog post itself and take whatever action is appropriate. - TheDaveRoss ( talk) 15:26, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Abu Dhar Azzam ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article is mainly sourced using primary sources from jihadist and terrorist websites, videos and documents; not very verifiable or reliable sources in my opinion. CentreLeftRight ✉ 05:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
The article " Nauman Niaz" is an autobiography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tala hayat ( talk • contribs) 19:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
David Robertson (footballer, born 1986) and David Goodwillie were found in a civil case to have committed rape.
Could someone establish the proper way to describe and flag this in the article. Some people seem to downplay it as 'personal life'.
Media coverage is rather different. [11]
is there a balance between blp and minimising sexual assault/rape vis a vis the victims of said rapes? Sumbuddi ( talk) 17:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Also I feel that given that this case has apparently ended the career of both men, then the incident belongs in the introduction. Sumbuddi ( talk) 18:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
This page has a section on "Controversies" which detail what appear to be two minor issues between a university president and two students. Neither have reliable sources to back them up (one is linked to a 404, the other a blog), the language is far from neutral (esp the section about Marc Kelly which gives this person's personal POV with no source), and I believe both should be removed. I am still a new editor and didn't feel confident removing it altogether, so I am looking for other editors for their input. (NOTE: I see that these issues were raised years ago in the TALK section of the page, but not resolved). Thanks. Aphra ( talk) 19:05, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Done--The unwarranted parts were removed.On reinstation, talk page discussion is the best way out. Winged Blades Godric 14:36, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
The biography Hoodrich Pablo Juan was tagged for AFD deletion, but should have been a speedy delete (G12) as it is entirely a cut-and-paste from this source. Thank you. Magnolia677 ( talk) 15:10, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Joplinplayer has three times ( [20], [21], [22]) inserted unsourced sensationalistic, inflammatory, and potentially libelous material to this article. Although there is a source at the end of the paragraph where the material was inserted, it in no way supports the questionable text. I have deleted the text once. It's unclear, but given Joplinplayer's assertions here, it may be an eyewitness account. Does the statement in question belong in the article? I don't want to get into an edit war with Joplinplayer, so I'm looking for some oversight here. 32.218.152.233 ( talk) 15:37, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
There's a deletion discussion about Infobox person/Wikidata that could affect BLPs, in case anyone here is interested. SarahSV (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Russell Brothers is a draft article I have written, still in my sandbox. I am posting here to ask advice about it. Below is a communication I sent to a more senior editor, Fuhghettaboutit, and the response I received: ---- Eagledj ( talk) 17:29, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm working on an article about a prominent Nashville businessman who turned into a major cocaine smuggler (as in Breaking Bad), Russell Brothers. It is a fascinating story but I have had second thoughts about it because the subject is still alive and due to be released from prison in December of 2016. Even though his name and exploits have been on the front pages of many newspapers in Tennessee and elsewhere, something about this gives me pause. He still has an opportunity to live some more years. I'm sure he will eventually be on Wikipedia, but I'm inclined to hold the article for a while, maybe even until his death — he is 78 now. He reportedly enjoys his bad boy image. Anyway, please take a look. Your thoughts ?
Regards as always, Eagledj ( talk) 17:40, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Mike Renzi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I have been attempting to explain to an editor that material based on personal interviews and knowledge cannot be added to this article unless it is also supported by independent reliable sources. Now looking over the article it appears largely to be overly promotional and extremely poorly sourced. I would appreciate it enormously if other editors with an understanding of our policies regarding living persons could take a look and help bring it at least somewhat in line with WP:BLP/ WP:RS requirements.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Leonard Lance ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is a discussion at Talk:Leonard Lance as to whether particular text is supported by sources or an original interpretation of them. Editors are invited to discuss either here or there. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 21:04, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
See Alexandra Savior. I reverted her publicists changes and restored her real name which is in several media profiles of her. Now I wonder. If I did the wrong thing you can undo and hide the name again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B11C:899D:156C:E53:AB15:BE48 ( talk) 21:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
I just walked into an article about Dr. Oz and there's some discussion about whether or not we should include the statement "Psuedoscience promoter" or not in the lead. You opinion is being sought to gain a consensus one way or another. My argument on keeping it out is very much a WP:BLP argument. ƘƟ SĦ 21:32, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Tom Brady ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
RfC about deflategate in the lede or not going on now. -- Malerooster ( talk) 19:36, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
This entire article is hyperbolic beyond belief, and uses youtube, facebook, Huffington Post, and some left-wing activist group as primary sources, which seems to be heavily POV.
Also, Despite his attempt at gaining fame, I just don't think this bloke is notable enough to be included on wiki, and definitely not the way his bio was written.
Stevo D ( talk) 20:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=David_Bradish This page is a vanity living persons biography. The page is an orphan and pretty much all the material is unattributed, aside from links to the individuals personal website. Seems to be mostly POV. I don't think he has done anything that deserves a wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.236.248 ( talk • contribs)