![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Somebody keeps adding a picture to this article claiming that its the convicted child abuser Christopher Paul Neil. I'm reluctant to assume good faith in this matter because there was an incident in 2007 when a troll tried to put up a picture of their friend (not Christopher) in the article as a prank. One user even got a picture from a Wikipedia admin's MySpace and added it to the article. See Talk:Christopher_Paul_Neil#Picture_on_the_left, Talk:Christopher_Paul_Neil#Pic. The users Jon P Stevenson ( talk · contribs) and Meanlevel ( talk · contribs) were blocked for this back in 2007, and now there's a new suspected sock Mollie White ( talk · contribs) doing this. The picture stayed in the article for a month (5 December - 5 January) this time; extra eyes on this article would be helpful. Thanks, -- Zvn ( talk) 06:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't feel remotely comfortable about this, the addition of details about Lange's alleged suicide attempt. I fear that editors would get their panties in a bunch if I attempted to remove sourced information, so I would really like to get a second opinion.... here are my issues with the source: the New York Post is a well-known publication, but it's also a salacious tabloid with a track record of printing vast amounts of harmful and mean-spirited gossip. That's not to say that we should never use the Post as a source, but in this case it seems hopelessly shady... if you read the article, it uses only vague, anonymous sources and doesn't allude to any confirmation from hospital or law enforcement authorities, or from Artie's family or representatives. Most importantly, the anonymously sourced article is the only news source claiming Artie has stabbed himself. All other articles covering the suicide attempt refer to the New York Post as their only reference. Until some independent confirmation of Artie's status can be given, it does not seem appropriate to reprint such sensitive and personal details in a BLP.
If you reply, please reply on the Artie Lange talk page, I'm copying this note there.-- The Fat Man Who Never Came Back ( talk) 05:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Acting as a representative of Tufts University and the subject of this entry -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Seldon_Bacow -- I wanted to point out an updated bio page with additional information that may be beneficial to this entry:
http://president.tufts.edu/1173361337309/Pres-Page-pres2w_1173575082497.html
Thank you,
Tufts Office of Web Communications
TuftsWebComm ( talk) 17:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Another editor is trying to insert what I feel is soapboxy material into this article. Can other editors please share their thoughts here. -- NeilN talk to me 17:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
This page has been subject to massive insertions of fraudulent information, probably from an offsite coordinated attack. I reverted to what appears to be the last good version, however I would appreciate it if someone could double check. Thanks, Triplestop x3 18:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today I nominated User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect for speedy deletion as a BLP-violating attack page per WP:CSD G10. It is a recreated version of a page that has been deleted three times - twice deleted following two AfDs and subsequently speedily deleted in a new version. It was speedily deleted again after I nominated it but has since been restored and is now being discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect. Views from uninvolved editors are invited on what should be done with the page. -- ChrisO ( talk) 16:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
Perhaps you can peruse this post - it reads like a fan page and not a standard Wikipedia entry. I have problems with various parts of this page - here's an example:
Legacy and playing style
Hardaway's style of play was rare in the early 1990s. Players of his height were encouraged to play closer to the basket and often were not ball handlers. He was a pass-first point guard who could score like a shooting guard. Hardaway was too big for most point guards to defend and too fast for shooting guards to defend.[17] Hardaway was also an underrated defender who finished in the top six in steals on three occasions. Hardaway's versatility and size set him apart from many other players of his era. He was the only player during the 1994-95 and 1995-96 seasons to average 20+ points 5+ assists and shoot above 50% on field goals. Early in his career Hardaway's flashy style of play was the closest thing the NBA had seen to Magic Johnson since his retirement. After the departure of Shaquille O'Neal in 1996 Hardaway's role changed to that of the primary scorer. Hardaway continued his role as a shooting guard in the early part of his stint with the Phoenix Suns. Later in his career injuries limited Hardaway's style to that of a versatile, smart role player who was a steady influence on younger players.
Hardaway's popularity reached its peak in the summer of 1996 as he was coming off two consecutive All-NBA first team selections and a selection to the USA Olympic Team. In addition he had the most popular basketball shoe on the market complete with the "Lil' Penny" commercial campaign for Nike, featuring a tiny puppet voiced by Chris Rock.
Todd <email redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.32.110 ( talk) 07:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
At least one credible accusation was made against Koestler of rape -- made by the respected British writer (and wife of the former Leader of the Opposition) the late Jill Craigie. This used to be discussed in the article on Koestler. Reading the discussion page for the article does not reveal any general consensus that all discussion of this matter should be sanitized from the article. But now it has disappeared. This seems to fit in with a larger effort in recent edits to portay Koestler in the best possible light: (a) playing down the significance of his healthy, much younger wife's joint suicide with him on the grounds that she had "no life without him", and (b) minimizing the detail provided on his interest in the so-called "paranormal." I have tried to re-insert some sense of balance into the discussion of his wife's suicide (we will see how long that survives...). If others care about having a credible article on this subject, perhaps they could pitch in on the other sections that have been edited in this way. Nandt1 ( talk) 13:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
You are of course right that this does not concern a living person. Apologies for that: my mind must have been wandering! Nandt1 ( talk) 13:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The article Maria Lourdes Afiuni seems like a classic WP:BLP1E. At the same time, the related Eligio Cedeño is a bit of a battlefield. Suggestions? Rd232 talk 11:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
People here should be aware of a conversation that I began at [1] which involves a WP:BLPSPS violation being edit warred into a BLP. I do not mean this to be a WP:FORUMSHOP. I only raise it now because it was pointed out there that I may have chosen the wrong board. Please direct any discussion of this topic to the other board so that it is conducted in one place. Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. -- GoRight ( talk) 00:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Some editors would like to include a rumour that Lady Gaga is an hermaphrodite in her article, see Talk:Lady Gaga#The hermaphrodite thing needs to be addressed. The rumour has appeared in multiple reliable sources. [2] Thoughts? Fences& Windows 00:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
What's the probability that, accidentally,
Of course it was a publicity gag of Gaga, and most likely one of the all-time best (and she's really embarrassed and harmed by the rumour...). It has been mentioned in quality newspapers. As written in timesonline: "If you google Lady Gaga the first thing you see is a related search asking “Is Lady Gaga a hermaphrodite?”". The information should be included as a matter of course. -- KnightMove ( talk) 16:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
See [3] which is about Ventura's program that you can see here [4] and accuses its members of planning genocide. Can we use this in the article? It also accuses Obama of attending the 2008 Bilderberg meeting, which he didn't attend. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 09:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Done
Rumors are surfacing all over the net that Amir Vahedi passed away, as of right now, there are no reliable sources to this... only blogs of some notable poker players. I've made several reversions, but somebody might want to give it a second set of eyes to see if it should be protected... I don't want to do it as it might be perceived as a COI.---
Balloonman
NO! I'm Spartacus!
06:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Iris Robinson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Born again Christian, and Northern Ireland MP. Just over half the text in this article is a controversy section, most of which is devoted to her views on homosexuality. It has recently come to light that last year she had an extramarital affair. This really needs some eyes. Martin451 ( talk) 19:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I think this article is acceptable as it stands. Yes, it does go into some detail about Mrs Robinson's views on homosexuality, but that is by far the most notable thing about her - it's what she's best known for, and whenever she's in the news, it's mentioned. We do need to be careful to respect BLP policy with this article given the recent admissions that she had an extramarital affair and attempted suicide, but I think the attention given to her anti-homosexuality comments is proportionate and appropriate. Robofish ( talk) 13:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
What is this, Wikiquote? A lot of the unbalance can be solved relatively painlessly by reducing the redundancy of the overquoting, and removing the pull quotes, which are inappropriate. Also, the names of her children are not necessary. Rd232 talk 17:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
How about this version of mine? Can still lose detail on the petitions I think, as I said on the article talk page. Remember it's a bio of a person, not an article on the controversy - that should influence the level of detail. Rd232 talk 22:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The subject is the head of the IPCC. Allegations of a conflict of interest emerged in mid-December. Pachauri issued a rebuttal and the news seems to have died down according to Google News--just two hits on "pachauri conflict of interest" in the past week, one is a website run by the John Birch Society and the other is in a user's comment on a news blog.
I'm in favor of waiting to see whether the story re-emerges before adding it in. The allegations appeared in a Sunday Telegraph special report in December and that story was covered in terms of "The Telegraph alleges..." and the like by reputable third party sources. Pachauri has been in the news a lot recently, for other reasons, but in this case the mud doesn't seem to have stuck. The speed with which the story was dropped by the mainstream media persuades me that this is a nine-day wonder and it would be undue weight to discuss the allegations at this stage.
Others suggest that the standard for inclusion has been met, as long as Pachauri's rebuttal is included. Further opinions are solicited. -- TS 14:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd really like to avoid rehashing the talk page discussion, chaps. Could we agree to leave it there and allow a previously uninvolved party to get a word in edgeways? -- TS 18:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The article could use a better picture too. Borock ( talk) 19:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I would be grateful if someone with experience in applying this policy would comment on the issue brought up by me at Template talk:Did you know#Stureby murder. -- Hegvald ( talk) 05:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Brooke is a former All Black with a distinguished career in sport. Over the last few days he's been in the New Zealand news for an alleged groping and assault in Fiji. I am concerned that the coverage of this incident occupies too great a proportion of the article, and a discussion has ensued at Talk:Robin Brooke#Brooke's bad behaviour. I don't think the discussion is coming to a consensus, and would appreciate some further feedback at that page.- gadfium 07:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The article creator added a link about a "scandal". The victim of the alleged "scandal" is the owner of the website alleging the scandal (I can add links proving that but perhaps I should not). The content edits of the editor User:DegenFarang primarily consist of linking to this same website, plus repeated abusive edits to BLPs like John Roberts and Russ Hamilton. I would simply revert the second sentence (of the two sentence article) and remove the link myslef, but the editor is wiki-hounding me so it seems best to leave it to others to check out. 2005 ( talk) 08:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Beyond that, I'm not even going to dignify this 'issue' with a response. It is just 2005 playing a game and attempting to divert attention from the real issue - hundreds of dubious poker-babes.com links across Wikipedia. Can somebody please tell me now where I can raise that issue? DegenFarang ( talk) 17:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:EL. Dougweller ( talk) 18:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
As should be obvious by now, I didn't bring this up sooner because I didn't want to face the blizzard of abusive wikihounding and deliberate falsehoods that occur whenever engaged with User:DegenFarang. See for a sordid mess he created at John Roberts. The greater wiki community needs to deal with this finally instead of just banning him and letting him come back. 2005 ( talk) 23:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi all I am new to this section of Wikipedia. I had an article about the Hon. Ali Mirzad which has gone through excruciating drilling and I have made all necessary changes (trying to please) every john smith that leaves a tag on my article ..lol But now I think it finally completed. Could an Admin remove thos infamous tags from article, please. Thank you for your time and cooperation. -- JamshidAwal ( talk) 21:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
User:JohnYettaw -- who has the same e-mail address as the owner of his travel blog (linked to in his WikiBLP's external links) and who has provided a recent photo to me for use on his biography here -- has interspersed within it comments addressing Yettaw's assertions that he is being portrayed in a false light, mostly due to poor sourcing that had been utilzed by Newsweek in a profile they had published about him. ↜ (‘Just M E ’here , now) 18:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
All of the personal details that have nothing to do with the incident that is the subject of this person's notariety should be deleted. I am no lawyer, but this article looks like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Jarhed ( talk) 06:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
John Yettaw Comments: I would like to thank "Jarhed" for his insight concerning a lawsuit "waiting to happen" (Rhetorically: If I were to sue any media-outlet... I would sue organizations that wrote and perpetuated articles that have defamed me and placed me in False Light). My 11 year old daughter learned about highly personal and tragic bits of my childhood concerning Child Sexual Abuse, also know as "CSA," when she read about it on Wikipedia's "John Yettaw" bio, and from Newsweek. In other words, my daughter and was NOT aware of my experience with "CSA" until she read about my childhood as reported on Wikipedia and Newsweek. I mean... "Tramps" shouldn't have to endure Invasion of Privacy... Libel... Or be Misfitted with painful images created by journalists with obvious "Father Issues."
I am still new to the backside of the screen of Wikipedia and when I am unable to figure out how to email an individual... I just press what buttons I can to leave a few words of concern - here and there. A few hours ago I left a message to whateverhisnameis who calls himself "Mandsford" who call me a "Dumb sonofabitch." - no matter how clean the vessel is... there always seems to be some bit of non-symbiotic-bacteria stuck to the lining. Mandsford... I am neither "Dumb"... and I KNOW you weren't talking about my mother.
Was there one of you (Wikipedians) who was in the water with me at any point? Is there one of you who can tell me that (at least) one highly trained 2-man team (with back-up) was NOT going to enter Inya Lake and enter the Compound and enter the home and seek to Murder the woman/women? I mean... let's face it... it's not as if someone could actually enter the Lake and penetrate the junta's active - AK-47 - grip on the compound... and get into the house. I was not "captured"... the junta/Court has my map with the police outpost circled with the words "Police" next to the spot identified as "US Embassy Residence." I say someday Intelligence Reports are going to surface that are going to make Mandsford-like-critics appear to be inconsiderate and impatient Human beings.
There is more to the story than what was "lost in translation" (and suppressed) during the trail and what Aung San Suu Kyi could talk about... and myself, as well (I never broke into the house... and I have it on a reliable source perhaps that someone initially refused to enter... and that the "Burmese" are watching the back side of Wiki - looking for tid-bits and details). Also... BTW... it was my Burmese Attorney who started the story (and reported to the press) that "God" had told me to save the woman (aka: Aung San Suu Kyi). I did not testify in court that "God" told me anything. I mean... I may seem Stupid to some of you ...I am not a Dumb SOB." I may have done something that was without question unconventional but from where I was standing in the water... I Did The Right Thing. I don't care if the entire world doesn't believe that Aung San Suu Kyi was targeted for murder via the Lake... there are a few people in this world who know otherwise. I had the courage to get into the water... while many mis-informed critics did nothing but poke their fingers at me on keyboards to ridicule and slam me. There have been some who have taken a deeper look at things and have refrained from negatively judging me. Some have even spoken positively about the increased attention that both ASSK and Burma have received.
I am Grateful for the experience of being exposed to... and enduring... world-wide Castigation. As I see it, I am in a great position to espouse the blessed-liberties of democratically endorsed Freedom of Speech and the spiritual and intellectual/mental/emotional freedoms found in practicing Forgiveness all in the same sentence and breath.
As I see it, there is a full-circle aspect to forgiveness which allows this phenomenon to become more readily obtainable... and - potentially - more fully capable of being prolonged (1) by sincerely asking for forgiveness from those whom one has offended (though forgiveness may not have beed granted)... and (2) freely extending forgiveness to those, of whom, offense(s) have occurred (though forgiveness has not been sought/requested). My dissertation is centered on the subject of: "Forgiveness as a Means of Emotional Resilience: Coping Skills from (and for) Survivors of Torture (and Torment)."
Tying-in my Wiki-posts with the Suu Kyi incident... I may not have done it exactly right, but I have successfully gotten my point across. You-all have been able to see my Wiki-Point-Of-View. And as far as the "Suu Kyi Trespasser Incident" goes... the incident CLOSED-OFF THE REAR OF THE COMPOUND.. and closed the "Rear Door" to - what could have been - a viable tragedy. To this end... I say... We Shall See... whether or not what I have shared is accurate.
For those of you who have sought to belittle me... may I suggest that you consider learning to bridle your crita-sizzles (aka: criticisms) in the absence of knowledge and relative-truth/accuracy and seek/attempt to direct your energy toward sustaining/protecting the lives and liberties of the less fortunate. As I am certain that most of you do... but for those who don't: Consider increasing the scope of your research/writing talents in Stopping/Reducing Genocide/Ethnocide though greater awareness. Consider Torture and Suicide Awareness as worthy endeavors, as well.
Please forgive me for my entry mistakes/impositions... but some of you people have pissed me off by perpetuating Newsweek mistruths about me and my choice and blessed childhood-and-current family. Your "JWY" page hurt my daughter. I am going to disappear from Wikipedia soon. For those of you who have been decent/respectful toward me (and have extended respect to many others who have been misunderstood) - Keep up the Good Work of Sanitizing the Project. I appreciate Wikipedia. I am neither a "Tramp"... nor am I "'The' Missouri Misfit"... nor am I a "Dumb sonofabitch." Period! Pardon my language.
Thanks to those of you who pertetuate kindness. John Yettaw JohnYettaw ( talk) 11:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The
Seyran Ohanyan (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) article is making an extreme and unsubstantiated claim that Seyran Ohanyan is an "alleged war criminal". I had removed this claim
[6], but it has again been reinserted
[7].
The sole source is a propaganda webpage from Azerbaijan
[8] that alleges two unproven claims - that a regiment of Russian forces took part in an alleged massacre of civilians (it calls the regiment a "genocide regiment") and that Ohanian led those Russian forces (a quote from the source "Xocalı şəhərinə hücum əməliyyatına 366-cı alayın zabitləri Seyran Ohanyan" - "Officers of the 366th regiment led by Seyran Ohanyan went to the city of Khojali"). No national or international court or international body has made this allegation against Ohanyan. No evidence is presented to back up the claim. The same webpage is filled with phrases and allegations that would make it unsuitable as a source for even a general article let alone one about a living person. For example, it talks about "Genocide of Azerbaijanis" by Armenians, of Azerbaijanis being "peaceful" and a "sinless people", of the alleged massacre being "one of the 20th century’s most serious crimes against all humanity – equal to
Lidice" (Dinc əhalinin vəhşicəsinə kütləvi qırğını bütün insanlığa qarşı ən ağır cinayətlərdən biri olmaqla, XX əsrin Xatın, Lidiçe, Babi Yar kimi dəhşətli faciələri ilə bir sırada dayanır), and that "lying Armenians" and "Armenian nationalists" have "invented" the 1915
Armenian Genocide to gain sympathy at an international level to justify their claims against the territory of Azerbaijan (Erməni millətçiləri qonşu dövlətlərə, o cümlədən Azərbaycan Respublikasına qarşı ərazi iddialarına haqq qazandırmaq, bunun vasitəsi kimi seçdikləri işğalçılıq, soyqırımı və dövlət terrorizmi siyasətini pərdələmək üçün hər vasitədən istifadə edərək, guya 1915-ci ildə ermənilərin soyqırımına məruz qaldıqları barədə uydurmaların beynəlxalq səviyyədə qəbul olunmasına cəhdlər göstərirlər).
Meowy
17:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Sourcing problems on a BLP, could use some attention. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 07:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Can some editors add this article to their watchlist ? It has been the subject of some recent BLP violations, which have stood for hours and days, and have even garnered media attention. I have semi-protected the page for now. Abecedare ( talk) 08:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Basically Townshend fans are arguing that a reference that claims Townshend was "falsely accused" of a child pornography offence should remain in the article [Townshend, in 2003 admitted to and accepted a police caution for a child pornography offence]. My position is that Townshend's own words and admissions, here [15], here [16] and here [17] should speak for themself, and that unless the article's subject claims to be falsely accused, or there is reasonable evidence that he was mentally incompetent or unstable, we should not admit such claims by unconnected third parties. Sumbuddi ( talk) 17:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I cleaned up and expanded Conrad Schmidt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) some months ago (although I find myself unable to recall what lead me to it). Since then there have been repeated removals of sourced content. The editors removing the sourced material now purport to be the subject of the article, but do not seem to stick with any single account. I left instructions to contact OTRS in my edit summaries, but have to assume that they were not read since the blanking continues. I asked for the page to be semi-protected in an effort to get the editor to discuss their concerns, but this was denied. Any advice? Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Anjem Choudary ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
on January 12, 2010 when asked why he lived on Social security benefits, Choudary said, "The money belongs to Allah and if it is given, you can take it." [19] He is understood to be employed by a Muslim organisation on a shoestring wage, which allows him to claim income support . [20]
I thought this was a pretty scary page - you'd really wanna make sure everything was sourced on pages like this, with the list of famous people on it. I semi'ed it as I figured it was a BLP minefield, as are all pages whose focus is "list of famous people with some controversial thingy (eg mental illness/depression/legal issue/drugs etc.)". I have semied some ones which are lists of famous people with mental illnesses for the same reason. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 22:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Can someone have a look at Ken Saro-Wiwa, which seems to have been written as straight propaganda and violates WP:BLP against Brian Anderson, a living person, (as well as arguably defaming Shell). As an example look at the statement, presented as straight fact "Brian Anderson, the Managing Director of Shell Nigeria, met with Owens Wiwa, Saro-Wiwa’s brother and offered to trade Saro-Wiwa’s freedom for an end to the protests against the company." The POV attack site source on which this is based [21] does not name Anderson and actually says "By reaching the settlement Shell avoided embarrassing testimony that would have alleged that the managing director of Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary at the time met with Owens Wiwa, Saro-Wiwa’s brother and offered to trade Saro-Wiwa’s freedom for an end to the protests against the company." This seems to me like a straightforward libel against Anderson, the source is a hearsay of an allegation that he acted illegally and we present it as fact. -- BozMo talk 21:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
On 12 December, the AfD on this article was closed as keep no consensus. I edited the article to add info and references, as several notable parts of Landeryou's life were not included and much of it was unsourced. All the statements in the article should now be sourced to reliable sources. Starting 23 December, an IP-hopping editor has been periodically sanitising the article, with the exception of a brief period when the article was semi-protected. I've recorded the edits made and why I object to them on the talk page. The IP editor(s) have never communicated; the IPs geolocoate to Australia, so it is possible that Landeryou or an associate is making the edits. I'd appreciate extra opinions on what the article should state about Landeryou, and whether the article needs to be indef protected.
Fences&
Windows
23:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
We could use investigative help from this board's regulars at the thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Let's look_at the OP too. There is a pattern of abuse that bears scrutiny. Jehochman Brrr 16:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
All the edits done on the subject of Krisztina Morvai should include full references to the sources used. The person in question seems to bee increasingly popular in Hungary, and her position as a MEP (Member of the European Parliament) increases her political potential.
Well, let's now talk about Krisztina Morvai for a moment, okay? Krisztina Morvai may turn out to be a really interesting person, but as always, all sources should be controllable. This is even more important, if the person in question has any real potential as a political leader. Krisztina Morvai has it, so it is a critical task to check all the sources! By the way, learn some Hungarian instead of trusting on second-hand translations :o)
An anon/SPA has added several variations of a description of a recent subtrivial TV appearance by the article subject, all but one completely unsourced, the most recent partly sourced. The anon's intent is clearly derisive; one of its edit summaries sarcastically describes the edit as intended to provide "an insight into Winners' winning personality". This should not be controversial, but User:Little grape has inexplicably reinstated the material while acknowledging on the talk page that the relevant BLP issues remain unresolved. I'm therefore looking for input from other editors. I find this (minor) contretemps of particular concern because the anon seems to have no other purpose in its recent edits other than to belittle article sujects (note the gratuitous insulting comment in this edit summary [24]). Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 16:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I reverted some unsourced material on Michelle Rhee's BLP. The user then readded it, but with a source. I've again reverted due to the nature of the material (negative material about her fiance) and that the language used wasn't quite accurate. I've added a quick note on the user's talk page. As I normally don't deal with BLP issues (I do watch this one however) I'm not even sure I was in the right and as I'm approaching 3 revisions, I'd appreciate it if someone else kept an eye on this article for a bit. Thanks Hobit ( talk) 22:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
A user has undone edits that were factual, while at the same time re-inserting information that is essentially unsourced. The user in question asserts that a single book, which I own, contains information, which it does not. Even if it did, mainstream reviews of the book claim that the info in the book is of duboius origin and that the book makes many factual errors.
The book in question also contains NO SOURCES and NO FOOT NOTES.
I'm not sure how an unsourced book can be a source for "facts" on wiki.
In addition, I placed other actual beliefs of CS on the page.
The user removed those beliefs in a effort (I can only assume) to make CS look more reasonable.
This is essentially political editing on the users part.
If this entry is to be considered valid, it needs to use real source material and the subject's own words should not be removed from the entry.
Can someone please look into this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leelikchi ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Please check out the, very offensive, picture. I know he is a "bad guy" but I don't think this is the kind of picture that we should use at the top of a bio. Kitfoxxe ( talk) 14:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The page about US Congressman Phil Hare is being repeatedly vandalized to include unsourced and politically charged material. The "Issues" section contains weasel words and appears to have been written to distribute biased information. The "Political Scandal" section is completely unsourced and refers to a scandal committed during the previous Congressman's term, making libelous statements about Hare's role in that administration. It should be locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HiFi22 ( talk • contribs) 23:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
HiFi22 as well as IP addresses 99.25.185.21 and 173.28.114.94 have been vandalizing and removing statistical information that has been very well documented and cited. Please check the jobs section and explain why those statistics have been removed. These users are clearly Hare staffers--whether it is congressional or political and should be completely ignored and disavowed. I move to block them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricotruth ( talk —Preceding undated comment added 03:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC).
User Philharefan and user Ricotruth are reverting any changes without discussion. Every time they revert the changes, they restore unsourced and factually inaccurate material. Hare was not elected on Memorial Day; there is no citation for the Political Scandal section; the issues sections contain partisan bias. The belief that I must be working for the guy to want his page to not read like a partisan hit piece is ridiculous, and more revealing of Ricotruth's partisan agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HiFi22 ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I have looked over the article and it is fairly obvious that many citations have been removed. Both users have been vandalizing the page by adding libelous claims as well as removing the necessary citations for each claim. I move that the article be reverted back to the previous article, WITH all citations! This will help decide what is credible and what is not. Furthermore, the section on jobs is some what biased, but SHOULD NOT be completely removed. The number of job losses is credible because Hare WAS Evan's district director.
Philharefan should also take not that if he is going to post that Hare was Evan's campaign manager, then he should provide the citations. Phil Hare was NOT Evan's campaign manager-only a volunteer for the campaign-hardly someone involved in any scandals like mentioned.
What say you fences?-- Celticsbruins ( talk) 03:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The page for B. Joseph White has become a page mainly about issues at the University of Illinois rather than about White as an individual. I am pasting below an alternative version of a biography that seems to be more in line with an encylopedia entry and with those entries of other university presidents. White's wikipedia page has become a place for individuals to air grievances about recent events at the University of Illinois. It seems like these should be deleted from White's page and, if individuals choose, added to the University of Illinois page, particularly given that White is no longer president at the University of Illinois.
Here is an idea for an alternate biography that is more balanced in its view of White and that is not so heavy with issues specific to the University of Illinois.
Bernard Joseph White (born 1947 in
Detroit, Michigan) is the James F. Towey Professor of Business and Leadership at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He focuses on governance, leadership and management. He is the author of The Nature of Leadership
[1]. White was born in
Detroit in 1947 and raised in
Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Education
White graduated magna cum laude from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in 1969. He then earned an MBA with distinction from Harvard Business School and a doctorate in business administration from the University of Michigan.
Career
Following graduation in 1975, White remained at Michigan as a professor of organizational behavior and industrial relations. He spent six years (1981–1987) at Cummins Inc. in Columbus, Indiana, first as vice president for management development and then as vice president for personnel and public affairs.
He returned to academia and served for a decade (1991-2001) as dean of the University of Michigan's Stephen M. Ross School of Business. He served as interim president of the University of Michigan in 2002.
White was named 16th president of the University of Illinois in November 2004, succeeding retiring president James J. Stukel, and took office on January 31, 2005.
White announced on September 23, 2009 his voluntary resignation as president effective December 31, 2009 [2]. His resignation followed an admissions controversy at the University’s Urbana-Champaign campus that resulted in most members of the university’s board of trustees resigning and new members being appointed by Governor Pat Quinn. In a letter to the board chairman, White said he took the action to enable the newly constituted board to select university leadership going forward. He said the effective date meant he would forgo a retention bonus as well as the remaining 18 months of a contract that was extended by unanimous vote of the trustees on November 13, 2008 [3].
White’s tenure as president was marked by success and failure. The $2.25 billion Brilliant Futures fund raising campaign, launched July 1, 2003, achieved 76% of its goal by August 31, 2009 with 72% of the campaign period elapsed [4]. The Global Campus Partnership, an initiative to make University of Illinois programs and degrees available online to qualified students, was terminated in 2009 due to an inadequate number of programs and students [5]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.72.118 ( talk) 16:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, thanks to you for presenting that, i'll have a look, it is true that the article is a biography of the subject and not an article about the university even if he is strongly connected to it. Off2riorob ( talk) 16:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
What is the next step? Would it be appropriate for me to post the above bio on White's page or is there an issue with taking out what has already been written? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akilib ( talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
A former associate of Drew Pinsky told the gossip rags that they did a lot of coke back in the 80s. It may or not be true, but it should be from a better source than lifeandstylemag.com, right? It's only been added from one IP (multiple times), but I suspect it'll come from elsewhere. tedder ( talk) 05:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
.
Hi. I wanted to get some feedback on this article. I don't remember how I first came upon it, but I've monitored it for BLP concerns for some time. It's about an infant (now little boy) who may or may not have been abused by his babysitter. It's marginally notable, with a smattering of reliable sources and enough public interest to have inspired an e-mail meme that led to a Snopes report ( [25]) and a sand volleyball tournament somewhere in Florida ( [26]). Nevertheless, it's a BLP about a minor whose only notability is in having possibly been the victim of a crime, and it has the potential to do harm to the childcare provider, who maintains her innocence and whose criminal status I've been unable to determine — the latest info I was able to find, she was expected to go on trial in October of 2007; if she was cleared but the papers no longer cared enough to report it, this "pending" status could seriously harm her reputation. (OTOH, it also provides neutral, sourced information.)
I've tried to figure out if this could be merged or redirected somewhere, as perhaps at Shaken baby syndrome, but there really doesn't seem to be a proper place. It could be moved to an article about the case in accordance with the suggestions at BLP, but under what name? And what to do about the unresolved information on Saunders?
I'd appreciate thoughts on this. I'd put it at the article's talk, but nobody would ever see it. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
.
I would like to think this person is not dead until his body is pulled from the rubble (and note that a bodyguard has just been rescued, unscathed) or until Ban Ki-moon says so. 201.137.210.141 ( talk) 15:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
There was some potential vandalism by IP editors on the article earlier claiming that Butt committed suicide earlier today, there were no sources added so the edits were reverted and the article semi-protected. It now appears that he may, if fact, have died, but reliable third-party sources are not forthcoming and some ip-editors, who claim to have known Butt personally, are concerned that a strong cultural bias against suicide will keep his death out of the news and as such deprive us of reliable sources. I did find one source discussing his death but it appears to be a blog(the link is on the article talk page) and I am not sure it is a strong enough source to include in the article. Having some extra eyes on the article for the next couple days, especially those of experienced editors, would be very helpful. Voiceofreason01 ( talk) 16:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
UrbanisTO ( talk · contribs) insists on describing the subject as a "Canadian American" because of some obscure Canadian law, but presents no reliable sources that describe Maddow as such. After failing to push this into the article, the editor began removing "American" from the article (despite the fact that she is described as such in a number of the reliable sources within the article). I would appreciate some suggestions. -- Scjessey ( talk) 00:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
“ | Any person born outside Canada after 15 February 1977, who has a Canadian parent at the time of birth, is automatically a Canadian citizen by descent. | ” |
The Seyran Ohanyan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article is repeatedly making an extreme and unsubstantiated claim that Seyran Ohanyan is an "alleged war criminal". I had removed this claim [28], and after it had been inserted again [29] I started a discussion on this page [30]. The claim was then removed as a BLP violation, but it has again been reinserted. I would remove it again, but there are, unfortunately, persons who would seize on this as a chance to block me for breaking revert restrictions. Would an administrator please remove the claim and protect the article until the matter is settled. Meowy 17:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Military personnel of the 366th Motorized Rifle Regiment, stationed in Stepanakert, was directly involved in the attack on Azerbaijani town of Khojali on 25-26 February 1992, in the course of which hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians were killed by Armenian forces. [6] [7] The National Assembly of Azerbaijan (Milli Məclis) of the Republic of Azerbaijan stated in its declaration that Ohanyan was one of the officers of 366th regiment who led the attack on Khojaly. [8]
Was thoroughly vindicated of all rape charges. [31] The police are quoted in a RS that the accuser has made false allegations against another person. (assuming that the AP is RS) I cited the account, and was reverted twice [32] (second revert) and the editor noted on his page [33]
How do you know she wasn't set up by a paid agent of the accused? You assume far too much. Her lawyer denies the version of events you have uncritically accepted and her civil case against the accused continues. You also say that he was "vindicated by police of the rape allegation". Whaaat? Where do you get that from? You need to re-read [1] and [2], especially:
Investigations may be closed without charges if prosecutors determine there is no federal jurisdiction, no federal laws were broken, or that it would be impossible to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. "Neither the investigation, nor its termination, should be perceived as a comment on guilt or innocence," the statement said.
Editing 101, really. ► RATEL ◄ 23:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Where a person has been actually vindicated by the police, noted by the Associated Press etc., is it improper to note the person was vindicated after months of the WP BLP containing the allegations? The editor involved previously sopught to have the rape prominently handled, alomg with allegations of "secret children" and the like, so I am unsure how to interpret his first revert comment of No appropriate. This is not germane to the article, would not be submissable in a court dealing with this case, and it is not our place to smear or exonerate individuals) Collect ( talk) 00:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Flowanda opened a discussion about my additions noting that Copperfield's accuser is under investigation by Seattle police for making false charges of rape against another guy and for prostitution. I believe that this, widely reported in reliable sources, belongs on the page in the relevant section. I think we need third party assistance here, and welcome Flowanda's invitation to discuss this Karelin7 ( talk) 03:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC). Karelin7 ( talk) 03:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Saw this over at WP:RFPP - could use some attention and additional eyes and some cleanup. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 07:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The discussion and wording of a section concerning sexual assault allegations could use some eyes, please. I took a shot at shortening the section while adding current details, but it needs work, and the discussion needs some better guidance. The proposed edits and discussion are at Talk:David Copperfield (illusionist)#Investigation ends. Thanks. Flowanda | Talk 23:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Sergiu Băhăian, allegations are serious, sources are in Romanian, and sorry but I'm off to bed. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Article Marcus (comedian). After a long series of unexplained reverts an IP Address user has claimed to be Marcus the subject of the article. If we assume good faith, despite the offensive tone, broken edits, and forced deletions, this user still needs to go through official channels. The article needs to be clearly marked so that editors like myself do not get hassled for making Good Faith efforts to preserve material or waste time trying to find citations. -- Horkana ( talk) 22:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Try and be gentle with him, he could well be the subject of the article, and will have a lot of knowledge about himself, point him in the right directions, if he likes to identify himself thats up to him, it is not illegal to have issues with your own biography, suggest he stops editing it but ask him what his issues are and have a look at them to see if the article can be improved. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
He made many edits and unexplained reverts before making any attempt to explain himself and he was very impolite when eventually did so. He has made a twitter post which is credible confirmation it was him. Massively impolite but at least credible, this is the most effort he has made to repond so far instead of just pushing through edits. http://twitter.com/ComedianMarcus/statuses/7879267179 He goes by his first name for his performance and he seems to have problems with his full name being included in the article, although it was referenced. Another editor had tried to add it with a weak source (a radio show) and I restored it with a better source, a local newspaper that even included photos of him. Most of the rest of the article is not properly referenced, quotes are excessively long, some of it is dubious self promotion, a lot of that would have to go too if I had been strictly enforcing WP:BLP. Maybe I should have done it sooner but I did post suggestions and links to guidelines the IP address talk page, and he had been previously warned for unconstructive edits. He doesn't get that he should read the guidelines, and ask for help. -- Horkana ( talk) 23:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I see he has contributed on other IPs. Hes got seven edits on this IP four of then removing this content he clearly didn't like..For much of his stand up career his surname was unknown as his stage name is simply Marcus. In an interview on Radio From Hell on Thursday July 16th, 2009, Marcus stated that his last name is Hardy. cited to this [karaokes-still-king-big-mamas/ knoxville dot com ..karaokes-still-king-big-mamas] link, The content seems to be gone now? If I was you I would go through the BLP and remove anything uncited and anything weakly cited to possibly not wikipedia reliable sources as well. I have trimmed it back. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
You're a fucking asshole. Thanks for erasing everything, you fucking prick. I hope I find out who you are, you piece of shit. Enjoy sitting in your mother's basement being a fucking loser. Fuck off.)
Bernie Miklasz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - User:Sdiver68 keeps on adding negative content in a "controversy section" from self-published sources, clearly not wp:rs. Trying to avoid 3rr. The only one that isn't a message board is "Bleacher Report" which is user-generated content. See [34] Thanks. -- Omarcheeseboro ( talk) 06:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The subject is the only living former President of India.
There has been some mild reverting over this image, so I am reporting it to this NoticeBoard (and not to an image deletion noticeboard) because it involves contentious material for this BLP. Annette46 ( talk) 07:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Repeated creation of "Criticisms" (sic) section that focus on name-calling. Might be the same person each time, because it's always "Criticisms" and it always points to the same sources. ---- IsaacAA ( talk) 13:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I've asked here briefly before, with underwhelming response, so let's try a more general and more elaborated question. Maria Lourdes Afiuni and Eligio Cedeno are both apparent WP:BLP1Es; Afiuni being the judge in a recent Venezuelan court case involving Cedeno, Cedeno being known for little else but the case, and Afiuni for nothing else. Maria Lourdes Afiuni was split from Eligio Cedeno, since the creator of Maria Lourdes Afiuni wanted a section on Afiuni in the Cedeno article and others disagreed.
So, what do people think: are one or both WP:BLP1E; and should they be
I'm not entirely convinced that an article on the Cedeno case alone is justified ( WP:NOTNEWS), but if the content is to have a home, that would be the best place. It's worth mentioning that the creator of both articles has sought repeatedly to add references to the case into a variety of Venezuela-related articles, including Venezuela, Politics of Venezuela, Government of Venezuela, and Human rights in Venezuela, and discussion on that has generally been unproductive. There is also a related AFD on Political prisoners in Venezuela, half of which is again taken up by Cedeno/Afiuni.
If I made that sound complicated, it isn't: what to do with these two related BLP1Es? Suggestions please. Rd232 talk 20:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
This article contains unconfirmed information as to the subject's father's death due to alcoholism, (quoting the NYTimes is not a legal defense against libel). It contains an entire section headed "Criticisms" with no balanced section of Achievements. Almost every comment is made by persons of the opposing political party of this subject or magazines and newspapers known to be politically slanted. It is so obvious it is embarassing to read, even by an Independant. This article should be heavily revised or deleted altogether. Mugginsx ( talk) 22:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 11:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The information on this page is incorrect. I have tried correcting it, but somebody called RaseaC and Delicious keeps adding it back. I really do not want to take you to court, because wikipedia is the greatest invention ever. Please either remove this page or let me correct the info.
The section on my community involvement is not correct. I was part of a collective that organized those events all I did was help with the media for the event. The reason why it causes me a lot of trouble is because the other people who did most of the organizing are upset. Also I no longer have a radio show, that was 3 years ago.
I think the best thing to do is remove the page. I am not a famous person and should not have a wiki page giving me credit for things that I can't take credit for.
If you have any questions please give me a call [phone number redacted] —Preceding unsigned comment added by ConradSchmidt ( talk • contribs) 18:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
There has been discussion at the article for Erik Prince about an allegation made. The material in question is "Prince was unfaithful to his first wife, Joan Nicole Prince, cheating on her with their nanny, Joanna Houck. When Joan Prince died of cancer in 2003, Houck attended the funeral while pregnant with Prince's child. Prince and Houck were married a year later.". Now that is some pretty contentious stuff! The sole source for this allegation is a book called "Master of War: Blackwater USA's Erik Prince and the Business of War" by Suzanne Simons. The book provides no evidence. No media sources have even made this allegation, let alone stated it as fact like this author does. Given Prince's reputation, I find it very difficult to believe that the mainstream media never repeated this allegation if it was even reasonably defensible. Even though the book could possibly be considered a reliable source, and we can't speculate on the authors intentions or motives, I (and other editors) have removed it because the allegation is pretty serious and isn't coroborrated by any other sources. Even the allegation isn't being made in other sources. Could I get some opinions on this? Niteshift36 ( talk) 00:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't really think there is anything I need to say here, WP:BLP is quite clear, but, I shall do so anyway to be absolutely transparent;
Regarding Negatively sourced material, BLP has several, clear requirements:
I believe that is all. Now, as said, I want to be absolutely clear, so, let us examine this thread for a minute:
Consensus is pretty clear, and I am sure, nothing more needs to be said.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Is this Wiki worthy? Seems like the old Court TV-like BLOG material to me, and potentially libelous in the discussion and reprint of certain (Secret) Grand Jury Testimony which seems to have never been legally released. Mugginsx ( talk) 22:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
At the Horst Ehmke article, about a retired German politician, an issue arose the other day about how to present and hedge the statement that the subject was briefly registered as a member of the Nazi party during his youth, but today denies he ever did so knowingly. An open-proxy IP user who is obviously some banned user with a grudge against me has now hijacked that issue and keeps reverting my BLP enforcement edits with edit-summary attacks against me (like, me being a nazi myself, and so on). Because of the unsavoury nature of these attacks, and because this is likely related to one of several very persistent harassment situations with various banned fans of mine, I would ask some other admin to take over watching this article. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a discussion User_talk:Gerda_Arendt#Elisabeth_von_Magnus where an editor has been advised against including details of the age and parentage of this Austrian mezzo-soprano. The German Wikipedia has apparenttly previously agreed to respect these wishes. On Googling for her name, the first hit I find is http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Magnus-Elisabeth-von.htm, which indicates that Magnus has contributed to the article. The conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt is mentioned more often than any other performer as one with whom she has worked. Surely it is relevant that this Nikolaus Harnoncourt just happens to be her father (as stated in our article on him and in some sites on European aristocracy linked in the above thread)? In my view in would be unencyclopedic to conceal the fact that she has worked so often with her father.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 16:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Some input at Aafia Siddiqui would be welcome.
Discussion at Talk:Aafia_Siddiqui#Issues with article. Rd232 talk 18:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Sandie Waters ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article creator selected a user name of british artist Michael Craig-Martin, and made some claims on the artists' article about an alleged affair with an american artist/painter ( Sandie Waters), citing a book by Richard Cork as a source. A google-book search within the same book reveals that the claimed material is not in the book. The article of Sandie Waters looks like a real BLP, but in effect is a hoax. Search engines do not know any painter/artist by the name of Sandie Waters, and thus I have CSD#G3 tagged the article. Amsaim ( talk) 21:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
There's a dispute on the talk page over the inclusion of some content about Gaiman's family connections with Scientology that was recently printed in the New Yorker. Input from more people would be welcome. Prezbo ( talk) 14:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Please see the discussion on the talk page. Nobody is trying to harm Gaiman's reputation; we're merely suggesting that his parents' religion is a noteworthy aspect of Gaiman's background, and should be included now that a reliable source (The New Yorker) has confirmed it. (To be clear: Gaiman's parents are/were Scientologists; Gaiman says that he is not. An anonymous editor has made this addition, which has been twice reverted. Discussion is ongoing; if Homolka is indeed a banned user, then only one editor has objected on the talk page to the material being added. -- Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Sarath N. Silva ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I stumbled upon this one due to copyright concerns, and was struck by what essentially looks like a very one-sided and poorly sourced negative BLP. Expert eyes would be required. MLauba ( talk) 12:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I have twice tried to correct the biography of Ambassador Roberto Flores Bermúdez. The corrections have been reverted on both occasions to the Mandara.
There are inaccuracies in the Jan 18, 2010 posting by Jared Preston.
Ambassador Flores Bermúdez has not been at any moment Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Micheletti Administration.
The text posted today Jan 20, 2010 accurately reflects his biographical profile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Concernedhonduran ( talk • contribs) 16:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Saw this at WP:RFPP. Other admins feel free to intervene as appropriate. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 01:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, how about this - Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Possible_way_forward_on_BLP_semiprotection_-_proposal as something which is using tools we have and might be moderate and workable enough to be acceptable overall. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Greg Caton has a number of challengable statements and someone saying it has legal probs. eyes would be appreciated. Ϣere SpielChequers 22:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Someone is trying to connect the BLP articles Eric Daniels with the unrelated BLP articles Paul Daniels and Debbie McGee as well as the article 52 Pickup. The user has inserted claims that Eric Daniels, a Lloyds TSB executive in the US and son of German/Chinese immigrants, is the brother of Paul Daniels, a British magician who was born in the UK, to parents with English names, and that Eric Daniels also "studied magic from an early age" and invented the practical joke 52 Pickup.
The user has so far been operating with the following SPAs:
The IPs resolve to Lloyds TSB in London and to a British broadband provider.
Could an admin please verify that I am not seeing things and block the hoaxter and do whatever else needs doing. Thanks. Hans Adler 14:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a mention that he was arrested in 1995 for leaving the scene of the accident. Did he plea bargain? Or was the charge dropped? Or he was fined? Or found not guilty? If not guilty, then BLP requires we mention this because to omit this would be a smear. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Frank Turek ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) No references, lot's of claims and praisal 109.240.196.178 ( talk) 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
i have been reviewing the biography of alan callan, and others, for a few years. i have noticed there are regular libellous and other unsupported attacks made. the subsequent editorial entries that i know of can be verified and the page seems to be in transition so that in depth sources and links are being produced - this may eventually prove especially helpful to people suffering from multiple myeloma. it appears therefore the recent request to delete the page may also be entirely malicious.
a recent discussion with the lawyer representing alan callan resulted in the lawyer suggesting a request be placed to lock the page in order to prevent malice. it seems so curious that after many years, as the links and information improve that a deletion request should suddenly appear. a muzick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amuzick ( talk • contribs) 23:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
User:Dream Focus has been advised of libelous comments, but is repeating the reinsertion, including ALL CAP version for emphasis.
Will add all diffs shortly, but posting this now [Diffs now listed].
Proofreader77 (
interact)
11:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
We have been through this many times on Roman Polanski. The guilty plea is for "unlawful sexual intercourse" which is not rape (according to L.A. court officials). The shouting (all caps now) of "CHILD RAPIST" is libelous, and I have advised [Dream Focus], then refactored the comments out when the response was to add the all-cap version. Proofreader77 ( interact) 11:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I propose indefinitely blocking Dream Focus, who is blatantly using Wikipedia for purposes unrelated to building an encyclopedia and is by his actions bringing Wikipedia into disrepute. -- TS 12:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I have raised this issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. -- TS 12:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Dream Focus, you're soapboxing through WP:BLP violations. You may not agree that your posts have gone astray of BLP, but consensus will most likely be that they have done. Either way, your soapboxing on the most widely watched user talk page on this website is blatant and isn't allowed. Gwen Gale ( talk) 12:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I think we need to use carefully sourced language in the article. There's probably a need to back away from soapboxing in some parts. I also think that in this situation with this well known, oft debated event, yelling LIBEL everytime someone phrases it differently then his exact plea is also unproductive.-- Cube lurker ( talk) 15:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
This US politician article seems on someone's muck list. It was reasonably ok a month ago but has degraded again with a hitlist controversy section. I've tagged it for NPOV and would appreciate anyone willing to have a go. Even fresh eyes to see if there are some easy fixes would be lovely. -- Banjeboi 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- 2/0 ( cont.) 20:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Álvaro Uribe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - over a long time this article has been repeatedly and deliberately vandalized by adding unsourced libelous claims, mainly by IPs, such as here by IP 186.80.103.26 and here by IP 70.50.197.35. I therefore ask for semi-protection of the article. // Túrelio ( talk) 08:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, user 87.105.185.61, I left now only very credible 3rd party sources (Microsoft, VMware, IT Underground, IEEE (in discussion), and Mr Bucko's company as well as his notable projects). Thank You for help. In my humble opinion the article contains much credible information, since it's important due to the fact that it's a bio of a living person. Hope it is enough well written to be valuable to Wikipedia. There are also other credible sources such as Gazeta Prawna (link provided) or Polish TV appearances. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kamilborkowski3 (
talk •
contribs)
10:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear 87.105.185.61, for Eleyt's notable achievements, please refer to the following: http://eleytt.com/research.html, then to Microsoft's or VMware's web site. When it comes to sources, I think I have added many sources and may provide even more. Please, refer to IEEE's "Against Code Injection with System Call Randomization, Zhaohui Liang; Bin Liang; Luping Li; Wei Chen; Qingqing Kang; Yingqin Gu". Thank You again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 10:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Please, refer to facts and links in Notable Security Input, or refer directly to companies involved to ask. I do not comment on business-related elements nor defend the article. I tried my best to make it valuable and provide many credible 3rd party sources. Let anyone judge by his understanding of the facts. Thank You for insightful tips, which in some way helped me to improve the article. Btw. I am not in IT security field, more in business.
Yours sincerely, Dr. Kamil Borkowski —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 11:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I have now significantly improved the document, provided many notable sources, removed many external links and made a section with ext links (everything based on the AfD discussion). I have given short notes describing links, removed less interesting part of paper. Hope now it is a valuable article. Sincerely Yours, Dr. Kamil Borkowski —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Would it be appropriate to include links to the webpages of a notable living person's business interests in the external links section of an article? I ask in relation to Kwong Wing Lam. Simonm223 ( talk) 01:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
There has been an issue arise about WP:BLP and a contention based on a response Moore gave on Inside the Actors Studio. Earlier in the week an editor came through and added "atheist" to a number of articles based on sourcing to the user-driven website celebatheist.com. That website claimed Moore said she was atheist in her response to the questionnaire given on the Actors Studio. The exchange went: If there is a God, when you arrive at the Pearly Gates, what is the first thing you'll say to him? Moore's response was "Wow, I was wrong, you really do exist." That was put forth as an admission of being an atheist, although the discussion did not include that specific answer. It was removed based on WP:RS. The issue now is that another editor has returned the same contention and cited the same questionnaire response as a basis to say she is an atheist and gave a cite to the San Francisco Examiner. Two of us contend that in either case, extrapolating that conclusion based on that response is synthesis. The editor who added said that the synthesis is on the part of the reporter who wrote the article. We still contend that to include such a claim in the Wikipedia article, in order to satisfy WP:BLP, a more definitive source is required, not the Actors Studio response, such as a interview in which she says "Yeah, I'm an atheist." More eyes and opinions on this are needed. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 03:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree with everything here and I just wanted to add that a few months ago I initiated a discussion on the RS noticeboard about examiner.com. The outcome of the discussion was that the source has about the same reliability as a blog with the same rules for citation.-- Jarhed ( talk) 06:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I have never done edits before on Wikipedia, but could someone please remove the racist remark over Ben S. Bernanke's picture titled "smirk jew". I don't agree with his current policy approach but there is no need to reference his religion or make remarks about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.88.92.113 ( talk) 16:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thanks
Off2riorob (
talk)
22:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
He was not born in 1977. He was born in 1968/69 as I went to school with him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.15.242 ( talk) 18:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm having problems with an IP editor who keeps inserting the claim that this (living) politician was born "Arad Bercovici". First of all, Berceanu states on his website that he is an Orthodox Christian and that both his parents were. Second, calling someone a Jew (and "Arad Bercovici" is undoubtedly a Jewish name) is unfortunately a form of slander in certain spheres of Romanian political discourse. Third, the "references" the IP has added are: a forum posting, the press organ of a xenophobic, anti-Semitic political party; and a blog posting. No reliable sources exist to corroborate this claim; it is counteracted by the subject himself; and it is (at least meant to be) defamatory. Could someone please intervene, perhaps to semi-protect the page? - Biruitorul Talk 17:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I get complaints about this section all the time, the IP has claimed he is the subject or someone close to the subject but there is no comfirmation, this is the section they want removed, I also think it should be removed, the content is not very encyclopedic, it is more tabloid and titilating, it is a minor incident and it was not widely reported and for us to give it global coverage in a small biography of a person who is not even excessively notable is a bit demeaning.. does anyone support removing it? citation one is virgin media [52] Two, is a book, rock movers and shakers and three is an interview with his sister commenting in the guardian.
'In 1990, Pearson was arrested for public indecency following an incident at a public toilet in New Malden in south west London.[1] He later pleaded guilty to the charges and was fined £100 and agreed to be bound over for a period of one year.[2] In an interview in 2008, Pearson's sister Denise (lead singer with Five Star) commented "...Stedman was arrested in a toilet, long before George Michael was - I remember him coming into my room and crying, "I didn't do what they said I did." [3] Off2riorob ( talk) 19:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, just keep talking like that Jarhed, and you'll be the one getting blocked along with your pal Off2RioRob. And if Roguana doesn't do it, I will. Rob has already been reported for incivility on numberous occasions in the past year, not to mention several blocks for misconduct. It's not a pretty picture. Meanwhile, not only has Rob been misleading people on this noticeboard about "receiving complaints all the time" about the section in question, but when he says that this has also been through the BLP noticeboard before, what he isn't telling you is that he is the one who brought it there [53]. He failed to get it removed then so now he's having another go with a different set of punters. In addition, at least three separate editors on the article's talk page have also told Rob that the section is appropriate for the article and is well sourced. As stated above, we do not censor Wikipedia just because it may not be flattering towards a subject. The section, as is, is at the foot of the article and does not give undue weight to the incident, nor is it judgmental or sensationalised. It merely states the facts in a totally impartial manner. At the time when the incident occured, Stedman Pearson was in one of the most successful British bands of the era. His arrest is notable information, much like George Michael who was arrested for the same thing in 1998. Pearson's was widely reported in the national press and on television at the time. There is even a video on You Tube from a TV show in 2003 in which he discusses it. If we start censoring Wikipedia just because celebrities, fans, or anybody else want unflattering details removed, then Wikipedia stops being an encyclopedia and becomes little more than a biased fansite, and its value diminishes. I suspect O2RRob's motives for continually trying to delete this information though are for other, more personal reasons. MassassiUK 12:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Join the discussion on the article talk page. Jarhed ( talk) 20:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Could someone please take a look at the Gail Riplinger article? There is a large unsourced "controversy" section which is larger than the rest of the article information combined, both of the references in the article are from the individual's own writings, and the external links section is a link farm divided into "support" and "criticism". Also, most of the edits are being done by an SPA...Should the article just be stubbed to what can be reliably sourced? -- Jezebel'sPonyo shhh 20:44, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Removed resolved tag--reasonable edits were reverted.-- Jarhed ( talk) 04:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I would like to raise for discussion the use of an image in the lead of the above article. The image was added December 14 by User:ChrisO. [54] It was removed on December 30 by User:GoRight, and has been a source of controversy since. It was removed by User:Wereon on January 2, [55] as a “highly unflattering, POV picture,” and was replaced by User:Kittybrewster without explanation. [56] It was removed twice by GoRight as a WP:BLPSPS violation on January 9, [57] [58] and replaced by User:Neilj, User:William M. Connolley and User:ChrisO. [59] [60] [61] It was removed again by User:Off2riorob, [62] and the page was protected. Following protection it was replaced by Kittybrewster, [63] and then by User:Peterlewis, User:ChrisO, and User:Beyond My Ken against a User:Qichina who stated that it was a “derogatory representation of a living person.” [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] It was again removed by User:Alexh19740110, [70] an IP, [71] User:Unitanode, [72] and then by myself, [73] before the page was again protected in its current state. The image has been the source of repeated and extensive disagreement on the talk page in the short time since it was added.
I see the image as a clear violation of WP:BLP, in that it presents the subject out of context and in a disparaging light. See WP:MUG for WP:BLP on images. It is out of context primarily in that it was put up on Flickr as showing Monckton while he was being “confronted,” and his event “disrupted” by youth activists, [74] yet this context is not provided. It is disparaging in that Monckton looks strained and uncomfortable, which is classically the type of image that is used for attack pieces, negative advertisements and the like. Here are a couple of examples with others. Here is another example with John McCain.
The image has repeatedly been defended on the ground that Monckton only looks this way because of a medical condition. I do not see how this is an acceptable argument. Monckton does not look strained in other photos, nor in another photo from the same event. [75] Nothing in the article mentions any medical condition, thus no reader would conclude this. Any medical condition is also missing context, per WP:MUG, although the context would seem rather profoundly inappropriate in the lead of the article. The image of McCain could equally be used saying that he looks strained due to war injuries, and that we should not hide his injuries.
I think the policy is clear, but I also think WP:BLP is clear that the burden is on editors to show that the material is acceptable ("The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material."). Many editors have opposed this image, from as early as it received any attention at all. The problem is that editors keep saying that Monckton looks just fine, or alternatively that he only looks odd because of a medical condition that we do not discuss in the article. I think there is much to indicate that this is simply false, and that rather he is quite agitated. I do not believe one should need to establish consensus against a picture that has been so widely contested as a BLP violation, but given that the article is now protected I'd like to ask for other views on the matter here. Mackan79 ( talk) 05:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
A photo of LBJ showing him with his gall-bladder surgery scars is about as proper as this photo is. It is clearly being used to enter information for which no proper RS source is being given, It is therefore deletable on sight under BLP policies. The salient part is not the part on images but the part on contentious material -- whether or not it is in an image. Collect ( talk) 11:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hurray: actual problem actually solved. New picture is fine. Rd232 talk 21:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't think Andrew de Rothschild actually exists. Searching this name in Factiva brought up nothing while a Google search brought up nothing substantial. I did a search for his supposed mother "Arianna Vanderbilt" in the New York Times archives and found nothing, although the birth, debut, marriage or death of such a person would have been reported there at some point. I think that the website "Rothschild Estates" (see link in the profile) is phony -- some kind of elaborate gag or perhaps even the work of an imposter, like the French fake Rockefeller from years back.
Andrew de Rothschild, his alleged parents, and his young heir Stefan are all probably fictitious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, I sent then to AFD to get some more opinions, Stefan_de_Rothschild and Andrew de Rothschild Off2riorob ( talk) 09:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
If they are so ultra-private, how come they have a website (with statements like "We do not foresee any new development in the Brazilian market in the near future")? There is nothing specific about their supposed assets except for famous vineyards actually owned by other Rothschilds. How come little "Stefan" is allowed to blog publicly? Real Rothschilds would have some kind of news trail. I can find nothing about their holding company "Rothschild Estates" either, or their supposed executives like "Christopher Wolfe" and "Miles Farrar-Hockley." This doesn't smell right. If there was a billionaire named Andrew de Rothschild, I'd probably have heard of him before. Perhaps the individual(s) behind this hoax intend to solicit money or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
This contact page (hxxp://www.rothschild-estates.com/#/contact/4537695150) is further proof of the fraud. It says to email their New York office "for US, Canadian, Chinese and Brazilean estates". Lol. My guess is that the person (hxxp://www.ted.com/profiles/view/id/416242) blogging as the teenage heir Stefan de Rothschild on Huffington Post (hxxp://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-de-rothschild) is behind it.
I don't think Stefan is a teenager, even. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Not a BLP issue. Moved to Wikipedia:Content noticeboard#Led Zeppelin article - moved from BLP noticeboard. Onorem ♠ Dil 15:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't know the technical term, but could an admin please wipe the history of this edit? Edit summaries used to personally attack a living person should be summarily wiped. Sadly it appears to be a dynamic IP so there's little value in blocking, but we can at least clean it up. WFCforLife ( talk) 21:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm in a bit over my (inexperienced) head here and was wondering if someone with a better knowledge of BLP issues (and COI issues) could give me a hand. The page Emily Deschanel has recently undergone a few edits by User talk:Fbeals indicating an official website for Emily Deschanel as seen here. While it's entirely possible that this is the real website, and I hate to not WP:AGF, it just doesn't feel like a professional website, and there isn't enough information posted yet to confirm or deny that this is her official site.
Unfortunately, it appears that User talk:Fbeals is the web designer for this site. This is quite clearly a WP:COI, but I don't think that matter is quite as pressing as the BLP issue: we can't have a website proclaiming to be the official website for a living person when it isn't.
Should I just delete the external link and warn the user? Or does this type of misrepresentation warrant more than a warning? Thank you so much for any help you can offer! Jhfortier ( talk) 04:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Daniel Tosh asked on his latest episode for everybody to vandalize his wikipedia article which was subsequently locked, this page seems to have been a dumping ground for users to edit instead. It's debateable as the man himself asked for it, but *shrug*, I've posted it here for others to decide. Q T C 07:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
A quote I put inside this article was removed, citing as reason: (→Criticism: delete 8 year old information; no evidence it is still true).
There followed several reverts (not by me) and no agreement on the talk page.
Setreset ( talk) 10:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I am struggling to find reliable citations to the quotes on Kevin Bacon. I found one reference which might be unreliable here, but I don't know what to do with the other quotes. The quotes that need citing are in the Personal life and Acting Career sections. I would be grateful if anyone can help me out. Thanks. Minima c94 ( talk) 12:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Concerns about tone, and UNDUE WEIGHT. Could use some additional eyes on this one. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 23:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I seem to have a difference of opinion with another editor regarding whether calling people "criminals" absent an actual conviction (or even trial) for criminal activity is consistent with our BLP policy. The specific edit in question is here [77] ("the criminals are going to get off on a technicality"). Opinions from uninvolved editors would be appreciated. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 22:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
At Talk:Cristina Fernández de Kirchner ( | article | history | links | watch | logs), Trust Is All You Need ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) continues to insert a WikiProject Socialism template, wich does not corresponds with the biograpyh of a living person who has never defined herself as socialist. The user refuses to give adecuate refs to his libellous claim. See [ Hist]// -- IANVS ( talk) 02:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I am the subject of this article and would be interested in assisting with the two issues listed templates-style, and connections with other articles-by supplying materials/ drafts/ links etc but would not wish to do the editing myself. Would be glad of feedback, please —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antlion1932 ( talk • contribs) 06:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I declined the speedy on this article but nonetheless have concerns about it with respect both to WP:BLP1E and the extent to which it is sourced to the British tabloid press. Consequently, I would be grateful if other editors could take a look. CIreland ( talk) 13:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Article has been sent to AFD for discussion . Off2riorob ( talk) 00:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
This edit to Manuel Rosales removed several sources (replacing the references with {{ fact}} tags); the validity of the source given is under current dispute at WP:RSN#Venezuelanalysis. The edit also removed entirely a highly contentious claim neutrally reported and clearly ascribed inline to the source ( Al Jazeera). The edit summary for this was "now, THIS, is what a WP:BLP violation looks like, very poor sources, to a very serious charge, double standards in Ven articles !!!!"
Comments please. Was it a BLP violation? And is it reasonable to delete sources in this way? Rd232 talk 09:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
For the record: the hitman's claims were made public earlier in the year, before the Al Jazeera interview: at the time the claims were reported by the Miami Herald; [85] ( El Mundo), and, er, that bastion of Chavismo, El Universal [86]. Rd232 talk 09:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Claims of criminal acts, sans any proof (a hitman does not qualify) are per se "contentious." We saw this in David Copperfield (illusionist) where allegations of criminal behavior remained in the article for an extended period, only to be shown false. I would suggest the recent discussions about BLPs make this abundantly clear. Collect
![]() | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Somebody keeps adding a picture to this article claiming that its the convicted child abuser Christopher Paul Neil. I'm reluctant to assume good faith in this matter because there was an incident in 2007 when a troll tried to put up a picture of their friend (not Christopher) in the article as a prank. One user even got a picture from a Wikipedia admin's MySpace and added it to the article. See Talk:Christopher_Paul_Neil#Picture_on_the_left, Talk:Christopher_Paul_Neil#Pic. The users Jon P Stevenson ( talk · contribs) and Meanlevel ( talk · contribs) were blocked for this back in 2007, and now there's a new suspected sock Mollie White ( talk · contribs) doing this. The picture stayed in the article for a month (5 December - 5 January) this time; extra eyes on this article would be helpful. Thanks, -- Zvn ( talk) 06:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't feel remotely comfortable about this, the addition of details about Lange's alleged suicide attempt. I fear that editors would get their panties in a bunch if I attempted to remove sourced information, so I would really like to get a second opinion.... here are my issues with the source: the New York Post is a well-known publication, but it's also a salacious tabloid with a track record of printing vast amounts of harmful and mean-spirited gossip. That's not to say that we should never use the Post as a source, but in this case it seems hopelessly shady... if you read the article, it uses only vague, anonymous sources and doesn't allude to any confirmation from hospital or law enforcement authorities, or from Artie's family or representatives. Most importantly, the anonymously sourced article is the only news source claiming Artie has stabbed himself. All other articles covering the suicide attempt refer to the New York Post as their only reference. Until some independent confirmation of Artie's status can be given, it does not seem appropriate to reprint such sensitive and personal details in a BLP.
If you reply, please reply on the Artie Lange talk page, I'm copying this note there.-- The Fat Man Who Never Came Back ( talk) 05:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
Acting as a representative of Tufts University and the subject of this entry -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Seldon_Bacow -- I wanted to point out an updated bio page with additional information that may be beneficial to this entry:
http://president.tufts.edu/1173361337309/Pres-Page-pres2w_1173575082497.html
Thank you,
Tufts Office of Web Communications
TuftsWebComm ( talk) 17:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Another editor is trying to insert what I feel is soapboxy material into this article. Can other editors please share their thoughts here. -- NeilN talk to me 17:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
This page has been subject to massive insertions of fraudulent information, probably from an offsite coordinated attack. I reverted to what appears to be the last good version, however I would appreciate it if someone could double check. Thanks, Triplestop x3 18:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Earlier today I nominated User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect for speedy deletion as a BLP-violating attack page per WP:CSD G10. It is a recreated version of a page that has been deleted three times - twice deleted following two AfDs and subsequently speedily deleted in a new version. It was speedily deleted again after I nominated it but has since been restored and is now being discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect. Views from uninvolved editors are invited on what should be done with the page. -- ChrisO ( talk) 16:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
Perhaps you can peruse this post - it reads like a fan page and not a standard Wikipedia entry. I have problems with various parts of this page - here's an example:
Legacy and playing style
Hardaway's style of play was rare in the early 1990s. Players of his height were encouraged to play closer to the basket and often were not ball handlers. He was a pass-first point guard who could score like a shooting guard. Hardaway was too big for most point guards to defend and too fast for shooting guards to defend.[17] Hardaway was also an underrated defender who finished in the top six in steals on three occasions. Hardaway's versatility and size set him apart from many other players of his era. He was the only player during the 1994-95 and 1995-96 seasons to average 20+ points 5+ assists and shoot above 50% on field goals. Early in his career Hardaway's flashy style of play was the closest thing the NBA had seen to Magic Johnson since his retirement. After the departure of Shaquille O'Neal in 1996 Hardaway's role changed to that of the primary scorer. Hardaway continued his role as a shooting guard in the early part of his stint with the Phoenix Suns. Later in his career injuries limited Hardaway's style to that of a versatile, smart role player who was a steady influence on younger players.
Hardaway's popularity reached its peak in the summer of 1996 as he was coming off two consecutive All-NBA first team selections and a selection to the USA Olympic Team. In addition he had the most popular basketball shoe on the market complete with the "Lil' Penny" commercial campaign for Nike, featuring a tiny puppet voiced by Chris Rock.
Todd <email redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.32.110 ( talk) 07:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
At least one credible accusation was made against Koestler of rape -- made by the respected British writer (and wife of the former Leader of the Opposition) the late Jill Craigie. This used to be discussed in the article on Koestler. Reading the discussion page for the article does not reveal any general consensus that all discussion of this matter should be sanitized from the article. But now it has disappeared. This seems to fit in with a larger effort in recent edits to portay Koestler in the best possible light: (a) playing down the significance of his healthy, much younger wife's joint suicide with him on the grounds that she had "no life without him", and (b) minimizing the detail provided on his interest in the so-called "paranormal." I have tried to re-insert some sense of balance into the discussion of his wife's suicide (we will see how long that survives...). If others care about having a credible article on this subject, perhaps they could pitch in on the other sections that have been edited in this way. Nandt1 ( talk) 13:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
You are of course right that this does not concern a living person. Apologies for that: my mind must have been wandering! Nandt1 ( talk) 13:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The article Maria Lourdes Afiuni seems like a classic WP:BLP1E. At the same time, the related Eligio Cedeño is a bit of a battlefield. Suggestions? Rd232 talk 11:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
People here should be aware of a conversation that I began at [1] which involves a WP:BLPSPS violation being edit warred into a BLP. I do not mean this to be a WP:FORUMSHOP. I only raise it now because it was pointed out there that I may have chosen the wrong board. Please direct any discussion of this topic to the other board so that it is conducted in one place. Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. -- GoRight ( talk) 00:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Some editors would like to include a rumour that Lady Gaga is an hermaphrodite in her article, see Talk:Lady Gaga#The hermaphrodite thing needs to be addressed. The rumour has appeared in multiple reliable sources. [2] Thoughts? Fences& Windows 00:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
What's the probability that, accidentally,
Of course it was a publicity gag of Gaga, and most likely one of the all-time best (and she's really embarrassed and harmed by the rumour...). It has been mentioned in quality newspapers. As written in timesonline: "If you google Lady Gaga the first thing you see is a related search asking “Is Lady Gaga a hermaphrodite?”". The information should be included as a matter of course. -- KnightMove ( talk) 16:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
See [3] which is about Ventura's program that you can see here [4] and accuses its members of planning genocide. Can we use this in the article? It also accuses Obama of attending the 2008 Bilderberg meeting, which he didn't attend. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 09:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Done
Rumors are surfacing all over the net that Amir Vahedi passed away, as of right now, there are no reliable sources to this... only blogs of some notable poker players. I've made several reversions, but somebody might want to give it a second set of eyes to see if it should be protected... I don't want to do it as it might be perceived as a COI.---
Balloonman
NO! I'm Spartacus!
06:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Iris Robinson ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Born again Christian, and Northern Ireland MP. Just over half the text in this article is a controversy section, most of which is devoted to her views on homosexuality. It has recently come to light that last year she had an extramarital affair. This really needs some eyes. Martin451 ( talk) 19:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I think this article is acceptable as it stands. Yes, it does go into some detail about Mrs Robinson's views on homosexuality, but that is by far the most notable thing about her - it's what she's best known for, and whenever she's in the news, it's mentioned. We do need to be careful to respect BLP policy with this article given the recent admissions that she had an extramarital affair and attempted suicide, but I think the attention given to her anti-homosexuality comments is proportionate and appropriate. Robofish ( talk) 13:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
What is this, Wikiquote? A lot of the unbalance can be solved relatively painlessly by reducing the redundancy of the overquoting, and removing the pull quotes, which are inappropriate. Also, the names of her children are not necessary. Rd232 talk 17:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
How about this version of mine? Can still lose detail on the petitions I think, as I said on the article talk page. Remember it's a bio of a person, not an article on the controversy - that should influence the level of detail. Rd232 talk 22:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The subject is the head of the IPCC. Allegations of a conflict of interest emerged in mid-December. Pachauri issued a rebuttal and the news seems to have died down according to Google News--just two hits on "pachauri conflict of interest" in the past week, one is a website run by the John Birch Society and the other is in a user's comment on a news blog.
I'm in favor of waiting to see whether the story re-emerges before adding it in. The allegations appeared in a Sunday Telegraph special report in December and that story was covered in terms of "The Telegraph alleges..." and the like by reputable third party sources. Pachauri has been in the news a lot recently, for other reasons, but in this case the mud doesn't seem to have stuck. The speed with which the story was dropped by the mainstream media persuades me that this is a nine-day wonder and it would be undue weight to discuss the allegations at this stage.
Others suggest that the standard for inclusion has been met, as long as Pachauri's rebuttal is included. Further opinions are solicited. -- TS 14:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd really like to avoid rehashing the talk page discussion, chaps. Could we agree to leave it there and allow a previously uninvolved party to get a word in edgeways? -- TS 18:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The article could use a better picture too. Borock ( talk) 19:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I would be grateful if someone with experience in applying this policy would comment on the issue brought up by me at Template talk:Did you know#Stureby murder. -- Hegvald ( talk) 05:22, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Brooke is a former All Black with a distinguished career in sport. Over the last few days he's been in the New Zealand news for an alleged groping and assault in Fiji. I am concerned that the coverage of this incident occupies too great a proportion of the article, and a discussion has ensued at Talk:Robin Brooke#Brooke's bad behaviour. I don't think the discussion is coming to a consensus, and would appreciate some further feedback at that page.- gadfium 07:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The article creator added a link about a "scandal". The victim of the alleged "scandal" is the owner of the website alleging the scandal (I can add links proving that but perhaps I should not). The content edits of the editor User:DegenFarang primarily consist of linking to this same website, plus repeated abusive edits to BLPs like John Roberts and Russ Hamilton. I would simply revert the second sentence (of the two sentence article) and remove the link myslef, but the editor is wiki-hounding me so it seems best to leave it to others to check out. 2005 ( talk) 08:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Beyond that, I'm not even going to dignify this 'issue' with a response. It is just 2005 playing a game and attempting to divert attention from the real issue - hundreds of dubious poker-babes.com links across Wikipedia. Can somebody please tell me now where I can raise that issue? DegenFarang ( talk) 17:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:EL. Dougweller ( talk) 18:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
As should be obvious by now, I didn't bring this up sooner because I didn't want to face the blizzard of abusive wikihounding and deliberate falsehoods that occur whenever engaged with User:DegenFarang. See for a sordid mess he created at John Roberts. The greater wiki community needs to deal with this finally instead of just banning him and letting him come back. 2005 ( talk) 23:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi all I am new to this section of Wikipedia. I had an article about the Hon. Ali Mirzad which has gone through excruciating drilling and I have made all necessary changes (trying to please) every john smith that leaves a tag on my article ..lol But now I think it finally completed. Could an Admin remove thos infamous tags from article, please. Thank you for your time and cooperation. -- JamshidAwal ( talk) 21:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
User:JohnYettaw -- who has the same e-mail address as the owner of his travel blog (linked to in his WikiBLP's external links) and who has provided a recent photo to me for use on his biography here -- has interspersed within it comments addressing Yettaw's assertions that he is being portrayed in a false light, mostly due to poor sourcing that had been utilzed by Newsweek in a profile they had published about him. ↜ (‘Just M E ’here , now) 18:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
All of the personal details that have nothing to do with the incident that is the subject of this person's notariety should be deleted. I am no lawyer, but this article looks like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Jarhed ( talk) 06:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
John Yettaw Comments: I would like to thank "Jarhed" for his insight concerning a lawsuit "waiting to happen" (Rhetorically: If I were to sue any media-outlet... I would sue organizations that wrote and perpetuated articles that have defamed me and placed me in False Light). My 11 year old daughter learned about highly personal and tragic bits of my childhood concerning Child Sexual Abuse, also know as "CSA," when she read about it on Wikipedia's "John Yettaw" bio, and from Newsweek. In other words, my daughter and was NOT aware of my experience with "CSA" until she read about my childhood as reported on Wikipedia and Newsweek. I mean... "Tramps" shouldn't have to endure Invasion of Privacy... Libel... Or be Misfitted with painful images created by journalists with obvious "Father Issues."
I am still new to the backside of the screen of Wikipedia and when I am unable to figure out how to email an individual... I just press what buttons I can to leave a few words of concern - here and there. A few hours ago I left a message to whateverhisnameis who calls himself "Mandsford" who call me a "Dumb sonofabitch." - no matter how clean the vessel is... there always seems to be some bit of non-symbiotic-bacteria stuck to the lining. Mandsford... I am neither "Dumb"... and I KNOW you weren't talking about my mother.
Was there one of you (Wikipedians) who was in the water with me at any point? Is there one of you who can tell me that (at least) one highly trained 2-man team (with back-up) was NOT going to enter Inya Lake and enter the Compound and enter the home and seek to Murder the woman/women? I mean... let's face it... it's not as if someone could actually enter the Lake and penetrate the junta's active - AK-47 - grip on the compound... and get into the house. I was not "captured"... the junta/Court has my map with the police outpost circled with the words "Police" next to the spot identified as "US Embassy Residence." I say someday Intelligence Reports are going to surface that are going to make Mandsford-like-critics appear to be inconsiderate and impatient Human beings.
There is more to the story than what was "lost in translation" (and suppressed) during the trail and what Aung San Suu Kyi could talk about... and myself, as well (I never broke into the house... and I have it on a reliable source perhaps that someone initially refused to enter... and that the "Burmese" are watching the back side of Wiki - looking for tid-bits and details). Also... BTW... it was my Burmese Attorney who started the story (and reported to the press) that "God" had told me to save the woman (aka: Aung San Suu Kyi). I did not testify in court that "God" told me anything. I mean... I may seem Stupid to some of you ...I am not a Dumb SOB." I may have done something that was without question unconventional but from where I was standing in the water... I Did The Right Thing. I don't care if the entire world doesn't believe that Aung San Suu Kyi was targeted for murder via the Lake... there are a few people in this world who know otherwise. I had the courage to get into the water... while many mis-informed critics did nothing but poke their fingers at me on keyboards to ridicule and slam me. There have been some who have taken a deeper look at things and have refrained from negatively judging me. Some have even spoken positively about the increased attention that both ASSK and Burma have received.
I am Grateful for the experience of being exposed to... and enduring... world-wide Castigation. As I see it, I am in a great position to espouse the blessed-liberties of democratically endorsed Freedom of Speech and the spiritual and intellectual/mental/emotional freedoms found in practicing Forgiveness all in the same sentence and breath.
As I see it, there is a full-circle aspect to forgiveness which allows this phenomenon to become more readily obtainable... and - potentially - more fully capable of being prolonged (1) by sincerely asking for forgiveness from those whom one has offended (though forgiveness may not have beed granted)... and (2) freely extending forgiveness to those, of whom, offense(s) have occurred (though forgiveness has not been sought/requested). My dissertation is centered on the subject of: "Forgiveness as a Means of Emotional Resilience: Coping Skills from (and for) Survivors of Torture (and Torment)."
Tying-in my Wiki-posts with the Suu Kyi incident... I may not have done it exactly right, but I have successfully gotten my point across. You-all have been able to see my Wiki-Point-Of-View. And as far as the "Suu Kyi Trespasser Incident" goes... the incident CLOSED-OFF THE REAR OF THE COMPOUND.. and closed the "Rear Door" to - what could have been - a viable tragedy. To this end... I say... We Shall See... whether or not what I have shared is accurate.
For those of you who have sought to belittle me... may I suggest that you consider learning to bridle your crita-sizzles (aka: criticisms) in the absence of knowledge and relative-truth/accuracy and seek/attempt to direct your energy toward sustaining/protecting the lives and liberties of the less fortunate. As I am certain that most of you do... but for those who don't: Consider increasing the scope of your research/writing talents in Stopping/Reducing Genocide/Ethnocide though greater awareness. Consider Torture and Suicide Awareness as worthy endeavors, as well.
Please forgive me for my entry mistakes/impositions... but some of you people have pissed me off by perpetuating Newsweek mistruths about me and my choice and blessed childhood-and-current family. Your "JWY" page hurt my daughter. I am going to disappear from Wikipedia soon. For those of you who have been decent/respectful toward me (and have extended respect to many others who have been misunderstood) - Keep up the Good Work of Sanitizing the Project. I appreciate Wikipedia. I am neither a "Tramp"... nor am I "'The' Missouri Misfit"... nor am I a "Dumb sonofabitch." Period! Pardon my language.
Thanks to those of you who pertetuate kindness. John Yettaw JohnYettaw ( talk) 11:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The
Seyran Ohanyan (
|
talk |
history |
protect |
delete |
links |
watch |
logs |
views) article is making an extreme and unsubstantiated claim that Seyran Ohanyan is an "alleged war criminal". I had removed this claim
[6], but it has again been reinserted
[7].
The sole source is a propaganda webpage from Azerbaijan
[8] that alleges two unproven claims - that a regiment of Russian forces took part in an alleged massacre of civilians (it calls the regiment a "genocide regiment") and that Ohanian led those Russian forces (a quote from the source "Xocalı şəhərinə hücum əməliyyatına 366-cı alayın zabitləri Seyran Ohanyan" - "Officers of the 366th regiment led by Seyran Ohanyan went to the city of Khojali"). No national or international court or international body has made this allegation against Ohanyan. No evidence is presented to back up the claim. The same webpage is filled with phrases and allegations that would make it unsuitable as a source for even a general article let alone one about a living person. For example, it talks about "Genocide of Azerbaijanis" by Armenians, of Azerbaijanis being "peaceful" and a "sinless people", of the alleged massacre being "one of the 20th century’s most serious crimes against all humanity – equal to
Lidice" (Dinc əhalinin vəhşicəsinə kütləvi qırğını bütün insanlığa qarşı ən ağır cinayətlərdən biri olmaqla, XX əsrin Xatın, Lidiçe, Babi Yar kimi dəhşətli faciələri ilə bir sırada dayanır), and that "lying Armenians" and "Armenian nationalists" have "invented" the 1915
Armenian Genocide to gain sympathy at an international level to justify their claims against the territory of Azerbaijan (Erməni millətçiləri qonşu dövlətlərə, o cümlədən Azərbaycan Respublikasına qarşı ərazi iddialarına haqq qazandırmaq, bunun vasitəsi kimi seçdikləri işğalçılıq, soyqırımı və dövlət terrorizmi siyasətini pərdələmək üçün hər vasitədən istifadə edərək, guya 1915-ci ildə ermənilərin soyqırımına məruz qaldıqları barədə uydurmaların beynəlxalq səviyyədə qəbul olunmasına cəhdlər göstərirlər).
Meowy
17:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Sourcing problems on a BLP, could use some attention. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 07:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Can some editors add this article to their watchlist ? It has been the subject of some recent BLP violations, which have stood for hours and days, and have even garnered media attention. I have semi-protected the page for now. Abecedare ( talk) 08:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Basically Townshend fans are arguing that a reference that claims Townshend was "falsely accused" of a child pornography offence should remain in the article [Townshend, in 2003 admitted to and accepted a police caution for a child pornography offence]. My position is that Townshend's own words and admissions, here [15], here [16] and here [17] should speak for themself, and that unless the article's subject claims to be falsely accused, or there is reasonable evidence that he was mentally incompetent or unstable, we should not admit such claims by unconnected third parties. Sumbuddi ( talk) 17:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I cleaned up and expanded Conrad Schmidt ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) some months ago (although I find myself unable to recall what lead me to it). Since then there have been repeated removals of sourced content. The editors removing the sourced material now purport to be the subject of the article, but do not seem to stick with any single account. I left instructions to contact OTRS in my edit summaries, but have to assume that they were not read since the blanking continues. I asked for the page to be semi-protected in an effort to get the editor to discuss their concerns, but this was denied. Any advice? Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Anjem Choudary ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
on January 12, 2010 when asked why he lived on Social security benefits, Choudary said, "The money belongs to Allah and if it is given, you can take it." [19] He is understood to be employed by a Muslim organisation on a shoestring wage, which allows him to claim income support . [20]
I thought this was a pretty scary page - you'd really wanna make sure everything was sourced on pages like this, with the list of famous people on it. I semi'ed it as I figured it was a BLP minefield, as are all pages whose focus is "list of famous people with some controversial thingy (eg mental illness/depression/legal issue/drugs etc.)". I have semied some ones which are lists of famous people with mental illnesses for the same reason. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 22:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Can someone have a look at Ken Saro-Wiwa, which seems to have been written as straight propaganda and violates WP:BLP against Brian Anderson, a living person, (as well as arguably defaming Shell). As an example look at the statement, presented as straight fact "Brian Anderson, the Managing Director of Shell Nigeria, met with Owens Wiwa, Saro-Wiwa’s brother and offered to trade Saro-Wiwa’s freedom for an end to the protests against the company." The POV attack site source on which this is based [21] does not name Anderson and actually says "By reaching the settlement Shell avoided embarrassing testimony that would have alleged that the managing director of Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary at the time met with Owens Wiwa, Saro-Wiwa’s brother and offered to trade Saro-Wiwa’s freedom for an end to the protests against the company." This seems to me like a straightforward libel against Anderson, the source is a hearsay of an allegation that he acted illegally and we present it as fact. -- BozMo talk 21:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
On 12 December, the AfD on this article was closed as keep no consensus. I edited the article to add info and references, as several notable parts of Landeryou's life were not included and much of it was unsourced. All the statements in the article should now be sourced to reliable sources. Starting 23 December, an IP-hopping editor has been periodically sanitising the article, with the exception of a brief period when the article was semi-protected. I've recorded the edits made and why I object to them on the talk page. The IP editor(s) have never communicated; the IPs geolocoate to Australia, so it is possible that Landeryou or an associate is making the edits. I'd appreciate extra opinions on what the article should state about Landeryou, and whether the article needs to be indef protected.
Fences&
Windows
23:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
We could use investigative help from this board's regulars at the thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Let's look_at the OP too. There is a pattern of abuse that bears scrutiny. Jehochman Brrr 16:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
All the edits done on the subject of Krisztina Morvai should include full references to the sources used. The person in question seems to bee increasingly popular in Hungary, and her position as a MEP (Member of the European Parliament) increases her political potential.
Well, let's now talk about Krisztina Morvai for a moment, okay? Krisztina Morvai may turn out to be a really interesting person, but as always, all sources should be controllable. This is even more important, if the person in question has any real potential as a political leader. Krisztina Morvai has it, so it is a critical task to check all the sources! By the way, learn some Hungarian instead of trusting on second-hand translations :o)
An anon/SPA has added several variations of a description of a recent subtrivial TV appearance by the article subject, all but one completely unsourced, the most recent partly sourced. The anon's intent is clearly derisive; one of its edit summaries sarcastically describes the edit as intended to provide "an insight into Winners' winning personality". This should not be controversial, but User:Little grape has inexplicably reinstated the material while acknowledging on the talk page that the relevant BLP issues remain unresolved. I'm therefore looking for input from other editors. I find this (minor) contretemps of particular concern because the anon seems to have no other purpose in its recent edits other than to belittle article sujects (note the gratuitous insulting comment in this edit summary [24]). Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 16:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I reverted some unsourced material on Michelle Rhee's BLP. The user then readded it, but with a source. I've again reverted due to the nature of the material (negative material about her fiance) and that the language used wasn't quite accurate. I've added a quick note on the user's talk page. As I normally don't deal with BLP issues (I do watch this one however) I'm not even sure I was in the right and as I'm approaching 3 revisions, I'd appreciate it if someone else kept an eye on this article for a bit. Thanks Hobit ( talk) 22:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
A user has undone edits that were factual, while at the same time re-inserting information that is essentially unsourced. The user in question asserts that a single book, which I own, contains information, which it does not. Even if it did, mainstream reviews of the book claim that the info in the book is of duboius origin and that the book makes many factual errors.
The book in question also contains NO SOURCES and NO FOOT NOTES.
I'm not sure how an unsourced book can be a source for "facts" on wiki.
In addition, I placed other actual beliefs of CS on the page.
The user removed those beliefs in a effort (I can only assume) to make CS look more reasonable.
This is essentially political editing on the users part.
If this entry is to be considered valid, it needs to use real source material and the subject's own words should not be removed from the entry.
Can someone please look into this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leelikchi ( talk • contribs) 17:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Please check out the, very offensive, picture. I know he is a "bad guy" but I don't think this is the kind of picture that we should use at the top of a bio. Kitfoxxe ( talk) 14:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
The page about US Congressman Phil Hare is being repeatedly vandalized to include unsourced and politically charged material. The "Issues" section contains weasel words and appears to have been written to distribute biased information. The "Political Scandal" section is completely unsourced and refers to a scandal committed during the previous Congressman's term, making libelous statements about Hare's role in that administration. It should be locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HiFi22 ( talk • contribs) 23:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
HiFi22 as well as IP addresses 99.25.185.21 and 173.28.114.94 have been vandalizing and removing statistical information that has been very well documented and cited. Please check the jobs section and explain why those statistics have been removed. These users are clearly Hare staffers--whether it is congressional or political and should be completely ignored and disavowed. I move to block them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricotruth ( talk —Preceding undated comment added 03:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC).
User Philharefan and user Ricotruth are reverting any changes without discussion. Every time they revert the changes, they restore unsourced and factually inaccurate material. Hare was not elected on Memorial Day; there is no citation for the Political Scandal section; the issues sections contain partisan bias. The belief that I must be working for the guy to want his page to not read like a partisan hit piece is ridiculous, and more revealing of Ricotruth's partisan agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HiFi22 ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I have looked over the article and it is fairly obvious that many citations have been removed. Both users have been vandalizing the page by adding libelous claims as well as removing the necessary citations for each claim. I move that the article be reverted back to the previous article, WITH all citations! This will help decide what is credible and what is not. Furthermore, the section on jobs is some what biased, but SHOULD NOT be completely removed. The number of job losses is credible because Hare WAS Evan's district director.
Philharefan should also take not that if he is going to post that Hare was Evan's campaign manager, then he should provide the citations. Phil Hare was NOT Evan's campaign manager-only a volunteer for the campaign-hardly someone involved in any scandals like mentioned.
What say you fences?-- Celticsbruins ( talk) 03:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The page for B. Joseph White has become a page mainly about issues at the University of Illinois rather than about White as an individual. I am pasting below an alternative version of a biography that seems to be more in line with an encylopedia entry and with those entries of other university presidents. White's wikipedia page has become a place for individuals to air grievances about recent events at the University of Illinois. It seems like these should be deleted from White's page and, if individuals choose, added to the University of Illinois page, particularly given that White is no longer president at the University of Illinois.
Here is an idea for an alternate biography that is more balanced in its view of White and that is not so heavy with issues specific to the University of Illinois.
Bernard Joseph White (born 1947 in
Detroit, Michigan) is the James F. Towey Professor of Business and Leadership at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He focuses on governance, leadership and management. He is the author of The Nature of Leadership
[1]. White was born in
Detroit in 1947 and raised in
Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Education
White graduated magna cum laude from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in 1969. He then earned an MBA with distinction from Harvard Business School and a doctorate in business administration from the University of Michigan.
Career
Following graduation in 1975, White remained at Michigan as a professor of organizational behavior and industrial relations. He spent six years (1981–1987) at Cummins Inc. in Columbus, Indiana, first as vice president for management development and then as vice president for personnel and public affairs.
He returned to academia and served for a decade (1991-2001) as dean of the University of Michigan's Stephen M. Ross School of Business. He served as interim president of the University of Michigan in 2002.
White was named 16th president of the University of Illinois in November 2004, succeeding retiring president James J. Stukel, and took office on January 31, 2005.
White announced on September 23, 2009 his voluntary resignation as president effective December 31, 2009 [2]. His resignation followed an admissions controversy at the University’s Urbana-Champaign campus that resulted in most members of the university’s board of trustees resigning and new members being appointed by Governor Pat Quinn. In a letter to the board chairman, White said he took the action to enable the newly constituted board to select university leadership going forward. He said the effective date meant he would forgo a retention bonus as well as the remaining 18 months of a contract that was extended by unanimous vote of the trustees on November 13, 2008 [3].
White’s tenure as president was marked by success and failure. The $2.25 billion Brilliant Futures fund raising campaign, launched July 1, 2003, achieved 76% of its goal by August 31, 2009 with 72% of the campaign period elapsed [4]. The Global Campus Partnership, an initiative to make University of Illinois programs and degrees available online to qualified students, was terminated in 2009 due to an inadequate number of programs and students [5]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.72.118 ( talk) 16:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, thanks to you for presenting that, i'll have a look, it is true that the article is a biography of the subject and not an article about the university even if he is strongly connected to it. Off2riorob ( talk) 16:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
What is the next step? Would it be appropriate for me to post the above bio on White's page or is there an issue with taking out what has already been written? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akilib ( talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
A former associate of Drew Pinsky told the gossip rags that they did a lot of coke back in the 80s. It may or not be true, but it should be from a better source than lifeandstylemag.com, right? It's only been added from one IP (multiple times), but I suspect it'll come from elsewhere. tedder ( talk) 05:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
.
Hi. I wanted to get some feedback on this article. I don't remember how I first came upon it, but I've monitored it for BLP concerns for some time. It's about an infant (now little boy) who may or may not have been abused by his babysitter. It's marginally notable, with a smattering of reliable sources and enough public interest to have inspired an e-mail meme that led to a Snopes report ( [25]) and a sand volleyball tournament somewhere in Florida ( [26]). Nevertheless, it's a BLP about a minor whose only notability is in having possibly been the victim of a crime, and it has the potential to do harm to the childcare provider, who maintains her innocence and whose criminal status I've been unable to determine — the latest info I was able to find, she was expected to go on trial in October of 2007; if she was cleared but the papers no longer cared enough to report it, this "pending" status could seriously harm her reputation. (OTOH, it also provides neutral, sourced information.)
I've tried to figure out if this could be merged or redirected somewhere, as perhaps at Shaken baby syndrome, but there really doesn't seem to be a proper place. It could be moved to an article about the case in accordance with the suggestions at BLP, but under what name? And what to do about the unresolved information on Saunders?
I'd appreciate thoughts on this. I'd put it at the article's talk, but nobody would ever see it. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
.
I would like to think this person is not dead until his body is pulled from the rubble (and note that a bodyguard has just been rescued, unscathed) or until Ban Ki-moon says so. 201.137.210.141 ( talk) 15:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
There was some potential vandalism by IP editors on the article earlier claiming that Butt committed suicide earlier today, there were no sources added so the edits were reverted and the article semi-protected. It now appears that he may, if fact, have died, but reliable third-party sources are not forthcoming and some ip-editors, who claim to have known Butt personally, are concerned that a strong cultural bias against suicide will keep his death out of the news and as such deprive us of reliable sources. I did find one source discussing his death but it appears to be a blog(the link is on the article talk page) and I am not sure it is a strong enough source to include in the article. Having some extra eyes on the article for the next couple days, especially those of experienced editors, would be very helpful. Voiceofreason01 ( talk) 16:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
UrbanisTO ( talk · contribs) insists on describing the subject as a "Canadian American" because of some obscure Canadian law, but presents no reliable sources that describe Maddow as such. After failing to push this into the article, the editor began removing "American" from the article (despite the fact that she is described as such in a number of the reliable sources within the article). I would appreciate some suggestions. -- Scjessey ( talk) 00:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
“ | Any person born outside Canada after 15 February 1977, who has a Canadian parent at the time of birth, is automatically a Canadian citizen by descent. | ” |
The Seyran Ohanyan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) article is repeatedly making an extreme and unsubstantiated claim that Seyran Ohanyan is an "alleged war criminal". I had removed this claim [28], and after it had been inserted again [29] I started a discussion on this page [30]. The claim was then removed as a BLP violation, but it has again been reinserted. I would remove it again, but there are, unfortunately, persons who would seize on this as a chance to block me for breaking revert restrictions. Would an administrator please remove the claim and protect the article until the matter is settled. Meowy 17:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Military personnel of the 366th Motorized Rifle Regiment, stationed in Stepanakert, was directly involved in the attack on Azerbaijani town of Khojali on 25-26 February 1992, in the course of which hundreds of Azerbaijani civilians were killed by Armenian forces. [6] [7] The National Assembly of Azerbaijan (Milli Məclis) of the Republic of Azerbaijan stated in its declaration that Ohanyan was one of the officers of 366th regiment who led the attack on Khojaly. [8]
Was thoroughly vindicated of all rape charges. [31] The police are quoted in a RS that the accuser has made false allegations against another person. (assuming that the AP is RS) I cited the account, and was reverted twice [32] (second revert) and the editor noted on his page [33]
How do you know she wasn't set up by a paid agent of the accused? You assume far too much. Her lawyer denies the version of events you have uncritically accepted and her civil case against the accused continues. You also say that he was "vindicated by police of the rape allegation". Whaaat? Where do you get that from? You need to re-read [1] and [2], especially:
Investigations may be closed without charges if prosecutors determine there is no federal jurisdiction, no federal laws were broken, or that it would be impossible to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. "Neither the investigation, nor its termination, should be perceived as a comment on guilt or innocence," the statement said.
Editing 101, really. ► RATEL ◄ 23:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Where a person has been actually vindicated by the police, noted by the Associated Press etc., is it improper to note the person was vindicated after months of the WP BLP containing the allegations? The editor involved previously sopught to have the rape prominently handled, alomg with allegations of "secret children" and the like, so I am unsure how to interpret his first revert comment of No appropriate. This is not germane to the article, would not be submissable in a court dealing with this case, and it is not our place to smear or exonerate individuals) Collect ( talk) 00:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Flowanda opened a discussion about my additions noting that Copperfield's accuser is under investigation by Seattle police for making false charges of rape against another guy and for prostitution. I believe that this, widely reported in reliable sources, belongs on the page in the relevant section. I think we need third party assistance here, and welcome Flowanda's invitation to discuss this Karelin7 ( talk) 03:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC). Karelin7 ( talk) 03:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Saw this over at WP:RFPP - could use some attention and additional eyes and some cleanup. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 07:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The discussion and wording of a section concerning sexual assault allegations could use some eyes, please. I took a shot at shortening the section while adding current details, but it needs work, and the discussion needs some better guidance. The proposed edits and discussion are at Talk:David Copperfield (illusionist)#Investigation ends. Thanks. Flowanda | Talk 23:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Sergiu Băhăian, allegations are serious, sources are in Romanian, and sorry but I'm off to bed. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Article Marcus (comedian). After a long series of unexplained reverts an IP Address user has claimed to be Marcus the subject of the article. If we assume good faith, despite the offensive tone, broken edits, and forced deletions, this user still needs to go through official channels. The article needs to be clearly marked so that editors like myself do not get hassled for making Good Faith efforts to preserve material or waste time trying to find citations. -- Horkana ( talk) 22:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Try and be gentle with him, he could well be the subject of the article, and will have a lot of knowledge about himself, point him in the right directions, if he likes to identify himself thats up to him, it is not illegal to have issues with your own biography, suggest he stops editing it but ask him what his issues are and have a look at them to see if the article can be improved. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
He made many edits and unexplained reverts before making any attempt to explain himself and he was very impolite when eventually did so. He has made a twitter post which is credible confirmation it was him. Massively impolite but at least credible, this is the most effort he has made to repond so far instead of just pushing through edits. http://twitter.com/ComedianMarcus/statuses/7879267179 He goes by his first name for his performance and he seems to have problems with his full name being included in the article, although it was referenced. Another editor had tried to add it with a weak source (a radio show) and I restored it with a better source, a local newspaper that even included photos of him. Most of the rest of the article is not properly referenced, quotes are excessively long, some of it is dubious self promotion, a lot of that would have to go too if I had been strictly enforcing WP:BLP. Maybe I should have done it sooner but I did post suggestions and links to guidelines the IP address talk page, and he had been previously warned for unconstructive edits. He doesn't get that he should read the guidelines, and ask for help. -- Horkana ( talk) 23:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I see he has contributed on other IPs. Hes got seven edits on this IP four of then removing this content he clearly didn't like..For much of his stand up career his surname was unknown as his stage name is simply Marcus. In an interview on Radio From Hell on Thursday July 16th, 2009, Marcus stated that his last name is Hardy. cited to this [karaokes-still-king-big-mamas/ knoxville dot com ..karaokes-still-king-big-mamas] link, The content seems to be gone now? If I was you I would go through the BLP and remove anything uncited and anything weakly cited to possibly not wikipedia reliable sources as well. I have trimmed it back. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
You're a fucking asshole. Thanks for erasing everything, you fucking prick. I hope I find out who you are, you piece of shit. Enjoy sitting in your mother's basement being a fucking loser. Fuck off.)
Bernie Miklasz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - User:Sdiver68 keeps on adding negative content in a "controversy section" from self-published sources, clearly not wp:rs. Trying to avoid 3rr. The only one that isn't a message board is "Bleacher Report" which is user-generated content. See [34] Thanks. -- Omarcheeseboro ( talk) 06:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The subject is the only living former President of India.
There has been some mild reverting over this image, so I am reporting it to this NoticeBoard (and not to an image deletion noticeboard) because it involves contentious material for this BLP. Annette46 ( talk) 07:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Repeated creation of "Criticisms" (sic) section that focus on name-calling. Might be the same person each time, because it's always "Criticisms" and it always points to the same sources. ---- IsaacAA ( talk) 13:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I've asked here briefly before, with underwhelming response, so let's try a more general and more elaborated question. Maria Lourdes Afiuni and Eligio Cedeno are both apparent WP:BLP1Es; Afiuni being the judge in a recent Venezuelan court case involving Cedeno, Cedeno being known for little else but the case, and Afiuni for nothing else. Maria Lourdes Afiuni was split from Eligio Cedeno, since the creator of Maria Lourdes Afiuni wanted a section on Afiuni in the Cedeno article and others disagreed.
So, what do people think: are one or both WP:BLP1E; and should they be
I'm not entirely convinced that an article on the Cedeno case alone is justified ( WP:NOTNEWS), but if the content is to have a home, that would be the best place. It's worth mentioning that the creator of both articles has sought repeatedly to add references to the case into a variety of Venezuela-related articles, including Venezuela, Politics of Venezuela, Government of Venezuela, and Human rights in Venezuela, and discussion on that has generally been unproductive. There is also a related AFD on Political prisoners in Venezuela, half of which is again taken up by Cedeno/Afiuni.
If I made that sound complicated, it isn't: what to do with these two related BLP1Es? Suggestions please. Rd232 talk 20:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
This article contains unconfirmed information as to the subject's father's death due to alcoholism, (quoting the NYTimes is not a legal defense against libel). It contains an entire section headed "Criticisms" with no balanced section of Achievements. Almost every comment is made by persons of the opposing political party of this subject or magazines and newspapers known to be politically slanted. It is so obvious it is embarassing to read, even by an Independant. This article should be heavily revised or deleted altogether. Mugginsx ( talk) 22:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 11:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
The information on this page is incorrect. I have tried correcting it, but somebody called RaseaC and Delicious keeps adding it back. I really do not want to take you to court, because wikipedia is the greatest invention ever. Please either remove this page or let me correct the info.
The section on my community involvement is not correct. I was part of a collective that organized those events all I did was help with the media for the event. The reason why it causes me a lot of trouble is because the other people who did most of the organizing are upset. Also I no longer have a radio show, that was 3 years ago.
I think the best thing to do is remove the page. I am not a famous person and should not have a wiki page giving me credit for things that I can't take credit for.
If you have any questions please give me a call [phone number redacted] —Preceding unsigned comment added by ConradSchmidt ( talk • contribs) 18:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
There has been discussion at the article for Erik Prince about an allegation made. The material in question is "Prince was unfaithful to his first wife, Joan Nicole Prince, cheating on her with their nanny, Joanna Houck. When Joan Prince died of cancer in 2003, Houck attended the funeral while pregnant with Prince's child. Prince and Houck were married a year later.". Now that is some pretty contentious stuff! The sole source for this allegation is a book called "Master of War: Blackwater USA's Erik Prince and the Business of War" by Suzanne Simons. The book provides no evidence. No media sources have even made this allegation, let alone stated it as fact like this author does. Given Prince's reputation, I find it very difficult to believe that the mainstream media never repeated this allegation if it was even reasonably defensible. Even though the book could possibly be considered a reliable source, and we can't speculate on the authors intentions or motives, I (and other editors) have removed it because the allegation is pretty serious and isn't coroborrated by any other sources. Even the allegation isn't being made in other sources. Could I get some opinions on this? Niteshift36 ( talk) 00:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't really think there is anything I need to say here, WP:BLP is quite clear, but, I shall do so anyway to be absolutely transparent;
Regarding Negatively sourced material, BLP has several, clear requirements:
I believe that is all. Now, as said, I want to be absolutely clear, so, let us examine this thread for a minute:
Consensus is pretty clear, and I am sure, nothing more needs to be said.— Dæ dαlus Contribs 00:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Is this Wiki worthy? Seems like the old Court TV-like BLOG material to me, and potentially libelous in the discussion and reprint of certain (Secret) Grand Jury Testimony which seems to have never been legally released. Mugginsx ( talk) 22:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
At the Horst Ehmke article, about a retired German politician, an issue arose the other day about how to present and hedge the statement that the subject was briefly registered as a member of the Nazi party during his youth, but today denies he ever did so knowingly. An open-proxy IP user who is obviously some banned user with a grudge against me has now hijacked that issue and keeps reverting my BLP enforcement edits with edit-summary attacks against me (like, me being a nazi myself, and so on). Because of the unsavoury nature of these attacks, and because this is likely related to one of several very persistent harassment situations with various banned fans of mine, I would ask some other admin to take over watching this article. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a discussion User_talk:Gerda_Arendt#Elisabeth_von_Magnus where an editor has been advised against including details of the age and parentage of this Austrian mezzo-soprano. The German Wikipedia has apparenttly previously agreed to respect these wishes. On Googling for her name, the first hit I find is http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Magnus-Elisabeth-von.htm, which indicates that Magnus has contributed to the article. The conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt is mentioned more often than any other performer as one with whom she has worked. Surely it is relevant that this Nikolaus Harnoncourt just happens to be her father (as stated in our article on him and in some sites on European aristocracy linked in the above thread)? In my view in would be unencyclopedic to conceal the fact that she has worked so often with her father.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 16:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Some input at Aafia Siddiqui would be welcome.
Discussion at Talk:Aafia_Siddiqui#Issues with article. Rd232 talk 18:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Sandie Waters ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article creator selected a user name of british artist Michael Craig-Martin, and made some claims on the artists' article about an alleged affair with an american artist/painter ( Sandie Waters), citing a book by Richard Cork as a source. A google-book search within the same book reveals that the claimed material is not in the book. The article of Sandie Waters looks like a real BLP, but in effect is a hoax. Search engines do not know any painter/artist by the name of Sandie Waters, and thus I have CSD#G3 tagged the article. Amsaim ( talk) 21:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
There's a dispute on the talk page over the inclusion of some content about Gaiman's family connections with Scientology that was recently printed in the New Yorker. Input from more people would be welcome. Prezbo ( talk) 14:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Please see the discussion on the talk page. Nobody is trying to harm Gaiman's reputation; we're merely suggesting that his parents' religion is a noteworthy aspect of Gaiman's background, and should be included now that a reliable source (The New Yorker) has confirmed it. (To be clear: Gaiman's parents are/were Scientologists; Gaiman says that he is not. An anonymous editor has made this addition, which has been twice reverted. Discussion is ongoing; if Homolka is indeed a banned user, then only one editor has objected on the talk page to the material being added. -- Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Sarath N. Silva ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I stumbled upon this one due to copyright concerns, and was struck by what essentially looks like a very one-sided and poorly sourced negative BLP. Expert eyes would be required. MLauba ( talk) 12:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I have twice tried to correct the biography of Ambassador Roberto Flores Bermúdez. The corrections have been reverted on both occasions to the Mandara.
There are inaccuracies in the Jan 18, 2010 posting by Jared Preston.
Ambassador Flores Bermúdez has not been at any moment Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Micheletti Administration.
The text posted today Jan 20, 2010 accurately reflects his biographical profile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Concernedhonduran ( talk • contribs) 16:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Saw this at WP:RFPP. Other admins feel free to intervene as appropriate. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 01:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, how about this - Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Possible_way_forward_on_BLP_semiprotection_-_proposal as something which is using tools we have and might be moderate and workable enough to be acceptable overall. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 01:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Greg Caton has a number of challengable statements and someone saying it has legal probs. eyes would be appreciated. Ϣere SpielChequers 22:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Someone is trying to connect the BLP articles Eric Daniels with the unrelated BLP articles Paul Daniels and Debbie McGee as well as the article 52 Pickup. The user has inserted claims that Eric Daniels, a Lloyds TSB executive in the US and son of German/Chinese immigrants, is the brother of Paul Daniels, a British magician who was born in the UK, to parents with English names, and that Eric Daniels also "studied magic from an early age" and invented the practical joke 52 Pickup.
The user has so far been operating with the following SPAs:
The IPs resolve to Lloyds TSB in London and to a British broadband provider.
Could an admin please verify that I am not seeing things and block the hoaxter and do whatever else needs doing. Thanks. Hans Adler 14:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
There is a mention that he was arrested in 1995 for leaving the scene of the accident. Did he plea bargain? Or was the charge dropped? Or he was fined? Or found not guilty? If not guilty, then BLP requires we mention this because to omit this would be a smear. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 15:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Frank Turek ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) No references, lot's of claims and praisal 109.240.196.178 ( talk) 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
i have been reviewing the biography of alan callan, and others, for a few years. i have noticed there are regular libellous and other unsupported attacks made. the subsequent editorial entries that i know of can be verified and the page seems to be in transition so that in depth sources and links are being produced - this may eventually prove especially helpful to people suffering from multiple myeloma. it appears therefore the recent request to delete the page may also be entirely malicious.
a recent discussion with the lawyer representing alan callan resulted in the lawyer suggesting a request be placed to lock the page in order to prevent malice. it seems so curious that after many years, as the links and information improve that a deletion request should suddenly appear. a muzick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amuzick ( talk • contribs) 23:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
User:Dream Focus has been advised of libelous comments, but is repeating the reinsertion, including ALL CAP version for emphasis.
Will add all diffs shortly, but posting this now [Diffs now listed].
Proofreader77 (
interact)
11:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
We have been through this many times on Roman Polanski. The guilty plea is for "unlawful sexual intercourse" which is not rape (according to L.A. court officials). The shouting (all caps now) of "CHILD RAPIST" is libelous, and I have advised [Dream Focus], then refactored the comments out when the response was to add the all-cap version. Proofreader77 ( interact) 11:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I propose indefinitely blocking Dream Focus, who is blatantly using Wikipedia for purposes unrelated to building an encyclopedia and is by his actions bringing Wikipedia into disrepute. -- TS 12:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I have raised this issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. -- TS 12:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Dream Focus, you're soapboxing through WP:BLP violations. You may not agree that your posts have gone astray of BLP, but consensus will most likely be that they have done. Either way, your soapboxing on the most widely watched user talk page on this website is blatant and isn't allowed. Gwen Gale ( talk) 12:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I think we need to use carefully sourced language in the article. There's probably a need to back away from soapboxing in some parts. I also think that in this situation with this well known, oft debated event, yelling LIBEL everytime someone phrases it differently then his exact plea is also unproductive.-- Cube lurker ( talk) 15:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
This US politician article seems on someone's muck list. It was reasonably ok a month ago but has degraded again with a hitlist controversy section. I've tagged it for NPOV and would appreciate anyone willing to have a go. Even fresh eyes to see if there are some easy fixes would be lovely. -- Banjeboi 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- 2/0 ( cont.) 20:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Álvaro Uribe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - over a long time this article has been repeatedly and deliberately vandalized by adding unsourced libelous claims, mainly by IPs, such as here by IP 186.80.103.26 and here by IP 70.50.197.35. I therefore ask for semi-protection of the article. // Túrelio ( talk) 08:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, user 87.105.185.61, I left now only very credible 3rd party sources (Microsoft, VMware, IT Underground, IEEE (in discussion), and Mr Bucko's company as well as his notable projects). Thank You for help. In my humble opinion the article contains much credible information, since it's important due to the fact that it's a bio of a living person. Hope it is enough well written to be valuable to Wikipedia. There are also other credible sources such as Gazeta Prawna (link provided) or Polish TV appearances. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Kamilborkowski3 (
talk •
contribs)
10:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Dear 87.105.185.61, for Eleyt's notable achievements, please refer to the following: http://eleytt.com/research.html, then to Microsoft's or VMware's web site. When it comes to sources, I think I have added many sources and may provide even more. Please, refer to IEEE's "Against Code Injection with System Call Randomization, Zhaohui Liang; Bin Liang; Luping Li; Wei Chen; Qingqing Kang; Yingqin Gu". Thank You again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 10:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Please, refer to facts and links in Notable Security Input, or refer directly to companies involved to ask. I do not comment on business-related elements nor defend the article. I tried my best to make it valuable and provide many credible 3rd party sources. Let anyone judge by his understanding of the facts. Thank You for insightful tips, which in some way helped me to improve the article. Btw. I am not in IT security field, more in business.
Yours sincerely, Dr. Kamil Borkowski —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 11:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I have now significantly improved the document, provided many notable sources, removed many external links and made a section with ext links (everything based on the AfD discussion). I have given short notes describing links, removed less interesting part of paper. Hope now it is a valuable article. Sincerely Yours, Dr. Kamil Borkowski —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Would it be appropriate to include links to the webpages of a notable living person's business interests in the external links section of an article? I ask in relation to Kwong Wing Lam. Simonm223 ( talk) 01:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
There has been an issue arise about WP:BLP and a contention based on a response Moore gave on Inside the Actors Studio. Earlier in the week an editor came through and added "atheist" to a number of articles based on sourcing to the user-driven website celebatheist.com. That website claimed Moore said she was atheist in her response to the questionnaire given on the Actors Studio. The exchange went: If there is a God, when you arrive at the Pearly Gates, what is the first thing you'll say to him? Moore's response was "Wow, I was wrong, you really do exist." That was put forth as an admission of being an atheist, although the discussion did not include that specific answer. It was removed based on WP:RS. The issue now is that another editor has returned the same contention and cited the same questionnaire response as a basis to say she is an atheist and gave a cite to the San Francisco Examiner. Two of us contend that in either case, extrapolating that conclusion based on that response is synthesis. The editor who added said that the synthesis is on the part of the reporter who wrote the article. We still contend that to include such a claim in the Wikipedia article, in order to satisfy WP:BLP, a more definitive source is required, not the Actors Studio response, such as a interview in which she says "Yeah, I'm an atheist." More eyes and opinions on this are needed. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 03:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree with everything here and I just wanted to add that a few months ago I initiated a discussion on the RS noticeboard about examiner.com. The outcome of the discussion was that the source has about the same reliability as a blog with the same rules for citation.-- Jarhed ( talk) 06:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I have never done edits before on Wikipedia, but could someone please remove the racist remark over Ben S. Bernanke's picture titled "smirk jew". I don't agree with his current policy approach but there is no need to reference his religion or make remarks about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.88.92.113 ( talk) 16:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thanks
Off2riorob (
talk)
22:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
He was not born in 1977. He was born in 1968/69 as I went to school with him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.15.242 ( talk) 18:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm having problems with an IP editor who keeps inserting the claim that this (living) politician was born "Arad Bercovici". First of all, Berceanu states on his website that he is an Orthodox Christian and that both his parents were. Second, calling someone a Jew (and "Arad Bercovici" is undoubtedly a Jewish name) is unfortunately a form of slander in certain spheres of Romanian political discourse. Third, the "references" the IP has added are: a forum posting, the press organ of a xenophobic, anti-Semitic political party; and a blog posting. No reliable sources exist to corroborate this claim; it is counteracted by the subject himself; and it is (at least meant to be) defamatory. Could someone please intervene, perhaps to semi-protect the page? - Biruitorul Talk 17:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I get complaints about this section all the time, the IP has claimed he is the subject or someone close to the subject but there is no comfirmation, this is the section they want removed, I also think it should be removed, the content is not very encyclopedic, it is more tabloid and titilating, it is a minor incident and it was not widely reported and for us to give it global coverage in a small biography of a person who is not even excessively notable is a bit demeaning.. does anyone support removing it? citation one is virgin media [52] Two, is a book, rock movers and shakers and three is an interview with his sister commenting in the guardian.
'In 1990, Pearson was arrested for public indecency following an incident at a public toilet in New Malden in south west London.[1] He later pleaded guilty to the charges and was fined £100 and agreed to be bound over for a period of one year.[2] In an interview in 2008, Pearson's sister Denise (lead singer with Five Star) commented "...Stedman was arrested in a toilet, long before George Michael was - I remember him coming into my room and crying, "I didn't do what they said I did." [3] Off2riorob ( talk) 19:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, just keep talking like that Jarhed, and you'll be the one getting blocked along with your pal Off2RioRob. And if Roguana doesn't do it, I will. Rob has already been reported for incivility on numberous occasions in the past year, not to mention several blocks for misconduct. It's not a pretty picture. Meanwhile, not only has Rob been misleading people on this noticeboard about "receiving complaints all the time" about the section in question, but when he says that this has also been through the BLP noticeboard before, what he isn't telling you is that he is the one who brought it there [53]. He failed to get it removed then so now he's having another go with a different set of punters. In addition, at least three separate editors on the article's talk page have also told Rob that the section is appropriate for the article and is well sourced. As stated above, we do not censor Wikipedia just because it may not be flattering towards a subject. The section, as is, is at the foot of the article and does not give undue weight to the incident, nor is it judgmental or sensationalised. It merely states the facts in a totally impartial manner. At the time when the incident occured, Stedman Pearson was in one of the most successful British bands of the era. His arrest is notable information, much like George Michael who was arrested for the same thing in 1998. Pearson's was widely reported in the national press and on television at the time. There is even a video on You Tube from a TV show in 2003 in which he discusses it. If we start censoring Wikipedia just because celebrities, fans, or anybody else want unflattering details removed, then Wikipedia stops being an encyclopedia and becomes little more than a biased fansite, and its value diminishes. I suspect O2RRob's motives for continually trying to delete this information though are for other, more personal reasons. MassassiUK 12:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Join the discussion on the article talk page. Jarhed ( talk) 20:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Could someone please take a look at the Gail Riplinger article? There is a large unsourced "controversy" section which is larger than the rest of the article information combined, both of the references in the article are from the individual's own writings, and the external links section is a link farm divided into "support" and "criticism". Also, most of the edits are being done by an SPA...Should the article just be stubbed to what can be reliably sourced? -- Jezebel'sPonyo shhh 20:44, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Removed resolved tag--reasonable edits were reverted.-- Jarhed ( talk) 04:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I would like to raise for discussion the use of an image in the lead of the above article. The image was added December 14 by User:ChrisO. [54] It was removed on December 30 by User:GoRight, and has been a source of controversy since. It was removed by User:Wereon on January 2, [55] as a “highly unflattering, POV picture,” and was replaced by User:Kittybrewster without explanation. [56] It was removed twice by GoRight as a WP:BLPSPS violation on January 9, [57] [58] and replaced by User:Neilj, User:William M. Connolley and User:ChrisO. [59] [60] [61] It was removed again by User:Off2riorob, [62] and the page was protected. Following protection it was replaced by Kittybrewster, [63] and then by User:Peterlewis, User:ChrisO, and User:Beyond My Ken against a User:Qichina who stated that it was a “derogatory representation of a living person.” [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] It was again removed by User:Alexh19740110, [70] an IP, [71] User:Unitanode, [72] and then by myself, [73] before the page was again protected in its current state. The image has been the source of repeated and extensive disagreement on the talk page in the short time since it was added.
I see the image as a clear violation of WP:BLP, in that it presents the subject out of context and in a disparaging light. See WP:MUG for WP:BLP on images. It is out of context primarily in that it was put up on Flickr as showing Monckton while he was being “confronted,” and his event “disrupted” by youth activists, [74] yet this context is not provided. It is disparaging in that Monckton looks strained and uncomfortable, which is classically the type of image that is used for attack pieces, negative advertisements and the like. Here are a couple of examples with others. Here is another example with John McCain.
The image has repeatedly been defended on the ground that Monckton only looks this way because of a medical condition. I do not see how this is an acceptable argument. Monckton does not look strained in other photos, nor in another photo from the same event. [75] Nothing in the article mentions any medical condition, thus no reader would conclude this. Any medical condition is also missing context, per WP:MUG, although the context would seem rather profoundly inappropriate in the lead of the article. The image of McCain could equally be used saying that he looks strained due to war injuries, and that we should not hide his injuries.
I think the policy is clear, but I also think WP:BLP is clear that the burden is on editors to show that the material is acceptable ("The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material."). Many editors have opposed this image, from as early as it received any attention at all. The problem is that editors keep saying that Monckton looks just fine, or alternatively that he only looks odd because of a medical condition that we do not discuss in the article. I think there is much to indicate that this is simply false, and that rather he is quite agitated. I do not believe one should need to establish consensus against a picture that has been so widely contested as a BLP violation, but given that the article is now protected I'd like to ask for other views on the matter here. Mackan79 ( talk) 05:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
A photo of LBJ showing him with his gall-bladder surgery scars is about as proper as this photo is. It is clearly being used to enter information for which no proper RS source is being given, It is therefore deletable on sight under BLP policies. The salient part is not the part on images but the part on contentious material -- whether or not it is in an image. Collect ( talk) 11:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hurray: actual problem actually solved. New picture is fine. Rd232 talk 21:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't think Andrew de Rothschild actually exists. Searching this name in Factiva brought up nothing while a Google search brought up nothing substantial. I did a search for his supposed mother "Arianna Vanderbilt" in the New York Times archives and found nothing, although the birth, debut, marriage or death of such a person would have been reported there at some point. I think that the website "Rothschild Estates" (see link in the profile) is phony -- some kind of elaborate gag or perhaps even the work of an imposter, like the French fake Rockefeller from years back.
Andrew de Rothschild, his alleged parents, and his young heir Stefan are all probably fictitious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, I sent then to AFD to get some more opinions, Stefan_de_Rothschild and Andrew de Rothschild Off2riorob ( talk) 09:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
If they are so ultra-private, how come they have a website (with statements like "We do not foresee any new development in the Brazilian market in the near future")? There is nothing specific about their supposed assets except for famous vineyards actually owned by other Rothschilds. How come little "Stefan" is allowed to blog publicly? Real Rothschilds would have some kind of news trail. I can find nothing about their holding company "Rothschild Estates" either, or their supposed executives like "Christopher Wolfe" and "Miles Farrar-Hockley." This doesn't smell right. If there was a billionaire named Andrew de Rothschild, I'd probably have heard of him before. Perhaps the individual(s) behind this hoax intend to solicit money or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 13:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
This contact page (hxxp://www.rothschild-estates.com/#/contact/4537695150) is further proof of the fraud. It says to email their New York office "for US, Canadian, Chinese and Brazilean estates". Lol. My guess is that the person (hxxp://www.ted.com/profiles/view/id/416242) blogging as the teenage heir Stefan de Rothschild on Huffington Post (hxxp://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-de-rothschild) is behind it.
I don't think Stefan is a teenager, even. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benf64 ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Not a BLP issue. Moved to Wikipedia:Content noticeboard#Led Zeppelin article - moved from BLP noticeboard. Onorem ♠ Dil 15:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't know the technical term, but could an admin please wipe the history of this edit? Edit summaries used to personally attack a living person should be summarily wiped. Sadly it appears to be a dynamic IP so there's little value in blocking, but we can at least clean it up. WFCforLife ( talk) 21:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm in a bit over my (inexperienced) head here and was wondering if someone with a better knowledge of BLP issues (and COI issues) could give me a hand. The page Emily Deschanel has recently undergone a few edits by User talk:Fbeals indicating an official website for Emily Deschanel as seen here. While it's entirely possible that this is the real website, and I hate to not WP:AGF, it just doesn't feel like a professional website, and there isn't enough information posted yet to confirm or deny that this is her official site.
Unfortunately, it appears that User talk:Fbeals is the web designer for this site. This is quite clearly a WP:COI, but I don't think that matter is quite as pressing as the BLP issue: we can't have a website proclaiming to be the official website for a living person when it isn't.
Should I just delete the external link and warn the user? Or does this type of misrepresentation warrant more than a warning? Thank you so much for any help you can offer! Jhfortier ( talk) 04:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Daniel Tosh asked on his latest episode for everybody to vandalize his wikipedia article which was subsequently locked, this page seems to have been a dumping ground for users to edit instead. It's debateable as the man himself asked for it, but *shrug*, I've posted it here for others to decide. Q T C 07:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
A quote I put inside this article was removed, citing as reason: (→Criticism: delete 8 year old information; no evidence it is still true).
There followed several reverts (not by me) and no agreement on the talk page.
Setreset ( talk) 10:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I am struggling to find reliable citations to the quotes on Kevin Bacon. I found one reference which might be unreliable here, but I don't know what to do with the other quotes. The quotes that need citing are in the Personal life and Acting Career sections. I would be grateful if anyone can help me out. Thanks. Minima c94 ( talk) 12:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Concerns about tone, and UNDUE WEIGHT. Could use some additional eyes on this one. Thank you for your time, Cirt ( talk) 23:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I seem to have a difference of opinion with another editor regarding whether calling people "criminals" absent an actual conviction (or even trial) for criminal activity is consistent with our BLP policy. The specific edit in question is here [77] ("the criminals are going to get off on a technicality"). Opinions from uninvolved editors would be appreciated. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 22:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
At Talk:Cristina Fernández de Kirchner ( | article | history | links | watch | logs), Trust Is All You Need ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) continues to insert a WikiProject Socialism template, wich does not corresponds with the biograpyh of a living person who has never defined herself as socialist. The user refuses to give adecuate refs to his libellous claim. See [ Hist]// -- IANVS ( talk) 02:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I am the subject of this article and would be interested in assisting with the two issues listed templates-style, and connections with other articles-by supplying materials/ drafts/ links etc but would not wish to do the editing myself. Would be glad of feedback, please —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antlion1932 ( talk • contribs) 06:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
I declined the speedy on this article but nonetheless have concerns about it with respect both to WP:BLP1E and the extent to which it is sourced to the British tabloid press. Consequently, I would be grateful if other editors could take a look. CIreland ( talk) 13:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Article has been sent to AFD for discussion . Off2riorob ( talk) 00:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
This edit to Manuel Rosales removed several sources (replacing the references with {{ fact}} tags); the validity of the source given is under current dispute at WP:RSN#Venezuelanalysis. The edit also removed entirely a highly contentious claim neutrally reported and clearly ascribed inline to the source ( Al Jazeera). The edit summary for this was "now, THIS, is what a WP:BLP violation looks like, very poor sources, to a very serious charge, double standards in Ven articles !!!!"
Comments please. Was it a BLP violation? And is it reasonable to delete sources in this way? Rd232 talk 09:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
For the record: the hitman's claims were made public earlier in the year, before the Al Jazeera interview: at the time the claims were reported by the Miami Herald; [85] ( El Mundo), and, er, that bastion of Chavismo, El Universal [86]. Rd232 talk 09:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Claims of criminal acts, sans any proof (a hitman does not qualify) are per se "contentious." We saw this in David Copperfield (illusionist) where allegations of criminal behavior remained in the article for an extended period, only to be shown false. I would suggest the recent discussions about BLPs make this abundantly clear. Collect