This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Carlos Alvarez-Aranyos ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The sourcing is poor. There are no verifiable sources of any objectivity. It reeks of self-promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.156.4.252 ( talk) 20:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Protection was removed from this article only in the last hour or so, since when there have been several unconstructive edits. Eagleash ( talk) 02:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I had WINK-TV on my watchlist because of a non-free image whose non-free use rationale was disputed. Earlier today, an new editor Floridanewsgator added quite an extensive new section called WINK-TV#"Code of Ethics" Lawsuit to the article at a fairly prominent location. This addition is the first an only edit made by this Floridanewsgator and describes a legal dispute between the station and one of its former reporters. The section goes into quite a bit of detail and reliable sources are provided, but there are also quite a few names of real people being mentioned who seem to be involved in ongoing legal proceedings. Could someone more familiar with this type of content take a closer look and see if there are any WP:BLP or other WP:UNDUE problems. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
This entire article is written by one user, which in the highest probability is the person himself. Totally biased and written in a way to cheat the public. Admins and members please have a look and take action as suitable. 121.244.94.9 ( talk) 08:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Can someone please update the Ralph Doubell image to an image of Ralph Doubell. Thanks,
James Doubell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesdoubell ( talk • contribs) 04:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
The Australian middle-distance runner Ralph Doubell is training on the running track for the Olympic competitions. The athlete shall end the Mexican Olympic games with two victories in the 800 metres final race: he shall win a medal gold and set a new world-record time. Mexico City (Mexico), October 1968.Do you have any evidence to suggest this caption is incorrect? clpo13( talk) 06:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to disprove that image other than to provide another source such as [ [1]], that shows a picture of my father.
Subject is not relevent.
Subject is a tabloid journalist that prank called a man running fir a congressional office job in Wisconsin USA. The call did not impede the man from winning the election. (May deserve a small foot note in the elected official's subject page)
Later subject Ian Murphy ran for one of the 27 congressional jobs in NY. In that election this subject was not on a major party and recieved the least number of votes of all candidates scarcely one percent of votes cast and less than one percent of registered voters. (Not relevent in any context) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.59.126 ( talk) 04:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I would like to bring to the attention of wikipedia user DAJF, who single handedly is responsible for 20% of the edits on the page of Fiona Graham. Unfortunately, all these edits were made either to either publish information that would her the subject (personally and professionally), or revert any "positive" edits. Considering his contributions to wikipedia, for the last nine years, have majoritarily been about her, and the subject of his edits, I think we should look into his impartiality toward 2, and, if needed, prevent him from editing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriss1991 ( talk • contribs) 00:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Biased interpretation of a particular interview of the Nobel Laurate Aziz Sancar in Turkish language used in his biography. /info/en/?search=Talk:Aziz_Sancar#Controversies_section . Its' flowing with opinions but not with clear definitions. Until a full; reliable English translation of the said interview is provided to be discussed upon; talk is bordering "libel" and "slander". WP:BLPSOURCES and importantly; whole interview was skimmed down to one single biased comment. Mulkhan ( talk) 23:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Until we have reliable sourcing about this as being a controversy, I thin is better left out of the article. It's a BLP and this feels like negative synthesis to me. I've read the talk page discussion as well and the English source. Need source to establish that it's true and significant, otherwise this is an editor's original research. SageRad ( talk) 09:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Please help me to understand this dispute. I cannot read Turkish, but i have been reading translations of stories about Sancar's interview, and i can't make heads or tails of it. Would both of the main disputants in this conflict please describe, in brief and simple terms, what Sancar said, and why it is important or not, and what it really means? It would help me, as i am sure it would help others who may be observing this dialogue without full understanding. Thank you. SageRad ( talk) 00:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Note that user Mulkhan is blocked and there is discussion at their talk page here on which i have added my opinion of this very distasteful situation. SageRad ( talk) 20:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
[Bhavna Limbachia] this page has incorrect data on and could be harmful to the person that this page is about. Under Rule, Remove contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced
The date on the page, [Bhavna Limbachia] is
is unsourced or poorly sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robson6244 ( talk • contribs) 17:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Twice now, User:Wnt has chosen to bring up the name of a living person in connection with various odd political statements about procedures that he imagines could have been carried out in response to a question on chimerism that has nothing to do with the person he mentions. I suggest Wnt be admonished, and that the edits be revdeleted, as they have no relevance to the topic at hand and are based on unproven accusations not mentioned in that person's article at WP.
μηδείς ( talk) 01:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
1) The current content of a Wikipedia article is not supposed to be some kind of limit on what can be said about the topic elsewhere. For example, people are supposed to be able to propose additions to articles on their talk pages.
2) [The] abortion was the source of national commentary during the 1990s. I provided a reference about it in the second edit just to be clear about that, but to people in the U.S. it is well known.
3) The Refdesk is supposed to be a place where people can use hypothetical examples with real-world relevance to emphasize the impact of new technologies. I was not claiming to speak of things that had been done, but only of things that could be done. A technique to determine the paternity of the fetus retroactively from the mother's blood might have been of interest to some of the Republicans who so doggedly dogged the president for so long. In any case, it illustrates how the ability to find out a fetus' paternity could have far-reaching social effects.
Wnt ( talk) 03:15, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Thierry Morand ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The English needs revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.229.205 ( talk) 13:27, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Calvin Cheng ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article has a bunch of issues with NPOV, balance and verifiabilty. There is an aggresive editor who undoes attempts to fix the article.
Ismahil Akinade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The correct version of events has been changed. It can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ismahil_Akinade&direction=prev&oldid=689268199
All the information regarding his convictions are 100% accurate. Please amend accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.127.40 ( talk) 12:21, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Susan Bitter Smith ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) There seems to be people adding and removing negative information from this article. Needless to say, I am concerned. -- I dream of horses ( My edits) @ 05:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Jaycen Joshua ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Page reads like a resume, no citations to prove work, singular editor making all changes probably a COI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quixoticzoomie ( talk • contribs) 21:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Recently the article for Huccha Venkat was deleted several times, to the point where it was salted. It was eventually restored and moved to Draft:Huccha Venkat, but there's still somewhat of an issue here, predominantly from a BLP angle. The guy has been in a film that looks to be potentially notable and he was on Big Brother, so notability is likely established - I haven't taken a close look at this yet.
The main issue is that the guy is primarily known for being controversial. His latest thing is that he said some allegedly offensive stuff to another person on a panel discussion, which led to him being arrested. His lawyer is now claiming that he's mentally ill. Given that this is all due to controversy and there's allegations of mental instability, I want to make sure that this is 100% kosher before going forward. I'm fairly certain that if this was accepted right now, it'd probably go straight to AfD where the BLP issues could prove fatal if not discussed beforehand. I'm leaning towards this guy probably meriting an article since there is a lot of coverage (his film could probably be merged into his page, making notability easier to establish), but the possible BLP concerns are troubling.
I've posted at WP:INDIA about this since there will be some issue with finding sources since India-related sources won't come up in a basic Google search. I'd recommend using this search engine to find things. It's one that was made by the India WP specifically for use on here. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 12:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
This article has reference more than 20 news article. Huccha Venkat is a personality, where its for right or wrong or mixture of both. The article is relevant. It needs to be instated without further due and dragging to different forums. Please reinstate the article, ASAP. Rajannamysore ( talk) 17:58, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary DeMoss (3rd nomination).
Comment there, if you will.
jps ( talk) 17:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
COULD SOMEONE FIX THE TOP PART OF THE PROFILE FOR "KARUNASENA KODITUWAKKU"? WHEN I EDITED IT ALL GOT MIXED UP JUST THE TOP PART. THE BOTTOM AREA IS ALL UPTO DATE
THANKS
D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.42.255.219 ( talk) 19:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Lorenzo Giuliano, commonly known by his stage name Haxent, is an international music producer and Dj. Supported on BBC Radio 1 by Chuckie & many others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Areyoureadyec ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
hi the mark evanier article publications section is missing a lot of groos. dark horse & other groos. -groo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.161.80.195 ( talk) 08:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Prejudicially negative, likely reputation-damaging characterizations re political views inserted into this short article here: Special:Diff/651182580 and here: Special:Diff/691706416 - IslandGyrl ( talk) 06:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
BBC story on the event Only in death does duty end ( talk) 15:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Asking for more eyes at Max Blumenthal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which for more than a month has seen IP editors trying to add unsourced (or poorly sourced) information to the BLP. Today a sockpuppet of perma-blocked editor NoCal100 ( talk · contribs) joined the fray. Thank you. 107.10.236.42 ( talk) 21:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
I've reverted this article to a version from 9 months ago due to the new content containing large amounts of negative or questionable material, which was mostly self-sourced or sourced to YouTube and other user contributed media. I'd appreciate any third party review. Prodego talk 23:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I've since replied in full.
I'm glad to know what does need reliable sources, and what can be sourced by more direct sources. We can, at least, support the career section for a large part, to which I'm fairly happy.
It seems on the page right now, one such source seems to be an interview. Does wikipedia accept interviews as viable references, if from a credible source?--
Kizzycocoa (
talk) 12:51, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Just letting people know I pinged the Video game WikiProject on the discussion. GamerPro64 04:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I have left a (large) response on Talk:Jim Sterling#WP:BLP violations and sourcing. Prodego talk 02:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Article still has a somewhat promotional style.
E.g. "John's vocal tracks are a list of hits including ... all the way down to an in progress track ... with David Guetta": requires citation. It also seems implausible that a track can be a hit while it is still "in progress."
E.g. "At 13, Martin bought a guitar, formed a band, and began playing Nirvana covers." Requires citation.
"John Martin is now working on his debut album which was planned to be released in August 2014, however it has been delayed awaiting a massive new collaboration before the release" is clearly promotional and requires citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.174.182.74 ( talk) 01:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
One editor ( Jbhunley) has opined at Talk:Rick Alan Ross:
Is this precisely in accord with WP:BLP? I had rather thought this policy says to edit conservatively, and stick primarily to fact. Here the interesting argument is made specifically that we should include "unflattering viewpoints" in order to tell readers what the "truth" is (i.e. that readers are not able to look at facts and decide what the truth is on their own without us guiding them)? And does this concept relate to COI policy in any way? Collect ( talk) 21:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
If you have a question about what I mean in my statement ask me on the fricking talk page as opposed to scurrying to a noticeboard. I do not know if you simply misunderstand the conversation I have been having with Rick Alan Ross over a period of months or if you simply like taking quotes out of context for some perverse reasons of your own.How are the opinions of other professionals and academics - as near as I see the only other professional commentary on your activities - a WP:FRINGE theory?? History is the analysis of facts and learned commentary is how Wikipedia adduces what is important and what should be included. Mere recitation of 'facts' in not a service to our readers. We do not play the game of 'present the facts and let people figure it out themselves'. Wikipedia presents what competent and appropriate commentators have to say about a matter because they are the ones best qualified to draw conclusions or comment on an issue. Avoiding, suppressing or minimizing the views of a significant yet unflattering viewpoint is whitewashing and why we have a WP:COI policy.
Also, if you wish to discuss me at a noticeboard please have the minimal courtesy to notify me on my talk page. It is a little thing but the discourtesy reflects poorly on you. Again, if you have questions about what I have said - ask me. Jbh Talk 22:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I will go post a notice about this discussion on the article talk page so the others can chime in if they want. I know you prefer to carry on with your little noticeboard point making exercises without letting others who are involved in the matter even know a discussion is ongoing so sorry for cramping your style. Jbh Talk 22:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Now, enough of this. Would you care to discuss your misunderstanding of what I said on the article talk page - you know, ask me what I was talking about - or would that not fit with whatever your purpose for starting this thread is? Jbh Talk 23:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Per NPOV, in Wikipedia we report on significant viewpoints, not just facts. In BLPs we edit conservatively, but NPOV is non-negotiable. So if there are unflattering viewpoints that are significant, we report them. - Cwobeel (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Jbh Talk 23:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)My statement was in response to the proposed edits in the section above. There exists significant WP:RS commentary which analyses and discusses the results/outcome of the Waco siege and Rick Ross's participation. Simply stating 'fact' without analysis is not what we do when there is RS analysis to discuss. Whether the analysis is flattering to the subject or not is irrelevant only whether it is a significant viewpoint offered by mainstream authors. To quote from WP:BLP "Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone." This is not talking about the 'mere recitation of facts' it is talking about proportionate reporting of significant opinions represented in reliable sources. Do you claim we should forgo the reporting of relevant analysis and significant opinion and merely report 'facts'? If so, please support your position with policy. Cheers. [10]
This should be closed before it degenerates further - the meaning of JBH's comment is clear (and yes, compliant with guidelines). I doubt Collect would have bothered to even bring this here if he didn't have a long-standing grudge against JBH - and noticeboards shouldn't be used to further a petty feud. Fyddlestix ( talk) 01:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
WP:DENY Gamaliel ( talk) 03:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I am posting, with permission, the following e-mail from blocked user Greg Kohs: " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Carrite/ACE2015&diff=next&oldid=692191767 User:Kevin Gorman engages (for the third time) in a violation of WP:BLP. He accuses me of "harassment", with no evidence to back up the claim. Online harassment is a criminal act in many jurisdictions, so this is clearly a problem vis-a-vis WP:BLP." End of e-mail.-- ukexpat ( talk) 17:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
|
Persistent COI editing to make this a puffy resume. Probably involves WP:MULTIPLE. Help would be appreciated. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
This has been worked up into a lengthy and much-sourced piece pertaining to conditions in Nigeria, much of which doesn't relate directly to the biography. Appears to have become an advocacy vehicle. I suspect a lot of the article can be cut, but since it's profusely referenced, someone is likely to raise a fuss, and if I go in and shear it as an IP, there's a decent chance I'll be tagged for vandalism. I've templated it for several concerns. Thoughts welcome. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 21:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Andrew Glover (composer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.
The element about supposed bNP membership is liablous and tehrefore should be removed from the article. Some on Wiki appear to have a vendetta and not an impartial stance or opinion in this matter. Leave the item out of teh article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.181.171 ( talk) 18:36, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Ariel Fernandez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I recently joined Wikipedia because I felt I could contribute with my expertise in stat mech. About a year ago, I came across the work of Ariel Fernandez and thought it was pretty cool stuff. When I recently looked it up in Wikipedia I noticed it was underplayed or missing. I tried to fix that, and a bunch of people instantly showed up and almost cut my head off. Then I tried to fix the Fernandez page and realized I was blocked. Then I joined the Talk page and was immediately accused of being a puppet of Fernandez. The attack came from User:Molevol1234 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). This person surely holds a grudge against Fernandez. He seems full of hatred and eager to destroy Fernandez. Everyone who sides with Fernandez seems to be accused of sock puppetry, whatever that is. For the record, I never met Fernandez. In fact I thought Fernandez was a woman since the first name suggests so, and became aware that he is a man when I searched in Wiki. It is obvious to me and to everybody I know that Fernandez has done much more in his career than getting two papers questioned or a paper with significant overlap. Give me a break! Why are you overplaying this? I read the Chronicle of Higher Education. It is obvious that Retraction Watch told the writer what to say, and the article is not even about Fernandez. There are people with more than 10 retractions for false data not even mentioned. One guy in Japan has 187 retractions (and counting). Not a word about him. There is not a shred of evidence pointing to misconduct or wrongdoing in Fernandez record, none in the public domain. I have never seen anything like this. Someone should fix this article. Spinrade ( talk) 16:22, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Jahquel "Jah" Goss (born May 6, 1999) is an American basketball player who is currently attending high school at the Eveyln Mack Academy in Charlotte, North Carolina. Jahquel previously attended Mott Haven Campus in Bronx, New York. Goss is a five-star recruit and is generally seen as top 10 best overall recruit in the 2018 Class by most basketball recruiting services. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyc Top100 Players ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Gregory Baum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I deleted the first paragraph of the page on Canadian theologian, Gregory Baum (Edited March 2014). It was libelous. Baum has never been excommunicated from the Catholic Church. He did not divorce Shirley Flynn (she died as his wife several years ago). Every couple of years this libelous, inaccurate, and insulting material is added to this page either by Monseigneur Foy, or his friends. These allegations need to be substantiated--which they cannot be since they are false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firstnobletruth ( talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Laurence Brahm ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
From a cursory reading of this over-long article it is clearly mostly written by the subject and/or groomed by him to remove any criticism. The article's main named contributor is "LBwikiacct", a user who has only edited this page, and a few other accounts (Shambhalahouse, AfricanConsensus) who also seem likely to be aliases of the subject. Their purpose is only to promote Brahm's image and career. 202.81.248.186 ( talk) 12:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Jesse Petrilla ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can editors please look at this article and see if further changes are necessary? On one hand we have an IP editor committing BLP violations and on the other we very likely have COI editing. I've removed the obvious BLP violations but haven't reverted to Martel10732's version as that also has issues. -- NeilN talk to me 01:59, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia page of Prashant Kishor shows wrong data. He never worked for WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION (WHO). He was born in 1977.
Currently 2 authors are trying to edit the content:
indopug is a regular editor in wiki and uses newspaper articles as reference for his content; whereas Paroma Bhat works with Prashant Kishor and can provide valid proof for the content.
Number of changes version reversions has increased more than 3 times. Can you please help in providing a solution for this?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasank86 ( talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Ketan Ramanlal Bulsara ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone please take a look at this, including the edit history. Thanks. Doug Weller ( talk) 20:30, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
The PROD didn't work. I put it up for AFD. I found out today it was previously deleted. DreamGuy ( talk) 16:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Sabrina Erdely ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone clean up this article fast, it's filled to the brim with trash. I'd do it myself but I have to go somewhere ASAP. Brustopher ( talk) 23:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Brian Bonner (linebacker) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article should fail PROC:BLP, but was created before cutoff date and has a couple awful parenthetical citations. I think the article meets WP:ATHLETE, so I did not consider it for deletion. There are stale cleanup tags from 2012. Anyone interested in improving this article? Delta13C ( talk) 02:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Please join the discussion about the appropriateness of utilizing a mug shot as the primary identification image at : Talk:Kent_Hovind#Mug_shot_redux -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Andrew Wilkinson (Canadian politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A user whose name is User:Penzerandrew, and thus has a possible but not confirmed WP:COI, has been persistently editing Andrew Wilkinson (Canadian politician) in recent weeks to bury any acknowledgement whatsoever of a reported controversy. This has also included the deliberate borking of reference templates to any media coverage of that controversy which remained in the article after the controversy itself was scrubbed — for example, their most recent edit stripped any portion of the "cite news" template from reference #4 that would actually have identified the specific news article being cited (the problem being that the article's title directly makes reference to the controversy), while leaving the remainder in place as an unlinked and untitled reference that was now formatted as a nonexistent "cite ork" template instead. But breaking reference templates is obviously not appropriate behaviour on Wikipedia regardless of the includability or excludability of the controversy itself.
I've placed temporary protection on the article twice now (semi wasn't suitable, as the editor has already surpassed autoconfirmed), but obviously don't want to indef it if I don't absolutely have to — but the user's persistence suggests that the content in question should be reviewed for WP:BLP compliance nonetheless and/or that the user should be blocked for vandalism if necessary. So I wanted to ask if somebody who hasn't already been involved with the matter could review whether it belongs there or not. Thanks. Bearcat ( talk) 20:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Arthur Chu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
See this discussiom for a series of attack on Arthur Chu. Please retract those negative attacks against him. 166.170.48.13 ( talk) 00:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Mike Turzai ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Wikipedia article devoted to Mike Terzai seems strongly biased. It has a distinctly glorified and propagandistic tone. There have only been a few editors to this page, and I presume those who would take the time to write it are the same people who take an interest in (and support) this politician, although whether or not they are affiliated with the subject of the article, I cannot say. Nevertheless, there is a strikingly uncommon use of adjectives describing the candidate and his actions. As with any article about a sitting politician, there is bound to be some subjectivity, but this is to be minimized. In this case, there would seem outright bias. At the least, there should be a disclaimer before this article and a suggestion for further editing.
Elizabeth Holmes ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
BLP violations galore, as well as WP:PEACOCK. Additional eyes would be welcome. - Cwobeel (talk) 17:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Two issue with this bio: the first is whether the subject, a victim of a shark attack, is notable for this incident alone--if not, AfD seems like an appropriate process. The second is that the article here appears to have been created by the author of a new book on Ms. Moore, so WP:COI is an obvious concern. Further scrutiny welcome. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Robin Spencer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Limhey and I have been having a dispute about a section in the Robin Spencer article concerning his role as a prosecutor in the Sally Clark case. This is how the section looked before I removed much of it on BLP grounds. [14] I took the view that the section was non-neutral and unduly long, and appeared to be an attempt to made Spencer look bad. Limhey disagreed.
My specific concerns included:
In response to Limhey's suggestion that I was trying to "sanitise" the article, I noted that some of the material I removed could perhaps be included if rewritten in a neutral and concise manner, but that I did not attempt to do so because I did not have access to the necessary sources. I also stated that I was open to the inclusion of other relevant material, such as details about the particular misconduct charges that were filed against Spencer.
I suggested we take the matter here for some more opinions, and I would be grateful for comments. Neljack ( talk) 22:54, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
This is from a COI editing problem reported at WP:COIN#FFBFFB.
Chris Christian seems to have problems. It claims he's won several Grammy awards, yet I can't find them in the official Grammy database. [15]. Citations at both Chris Christian and Home Sweet Home Records are very weak. Google searches are not bringing up reliable third party sources. A Grammy-winning musician should have more press visibility than this. Am I missing something, or is something badly wrong with these articles? Help requested from someone who does music articles. Thanks. John Nagle ( talk) 23:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
The article on Marc Randazza ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) could do with some scrutiny. It seems real-world arbitration is spilling over on Wikipedia. Uninvolved editors would be welcome to make sure we neutrally summarize what reliable sources report. See also Talk:Marc Randazza#BLP Violation and SPA. Huon ( talk) 23:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Mudar Zahran ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is persistent edit-warring at Mudar Zahran over BLP issues, involving (among others) an IP editor who claims to be the article's subject. More eyes would be helpful, especially editors who can read Arabic sources. Full protection may be appropriate. 66.87.115.139 ( talk) 15:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Gwen Stefani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article says she was a founding member of No Doubt. She wasn't. Her brother was. She joined the band later.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:364d:70e0:90d7:dcc3:6f3f:d055 ( talk) 18:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Today, Stoya accused her former boyfriend, Deen, of raping her on her twitter. Multiple users added the accusation to their respective articles citing only to the tweet which led to reversions and semi-page protections. Another user cited to a post from Buzzfeed [16] which I did not feel was adequate for such a serious allegation. Please keep an eye out on the respective articles. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 05:33, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
As predicted, coverage continues growing -- and now it is reported in New York Magazine -- which is additionally reporting that The Frisky is ending Deen's sex advice column due to the accusation, a real-world consequence. Is that addition not sourcing enough? Pandeist ( talk) 19:26, 29 November 2015 (UTC) And now reported in Cosmopolitan as well. Pandeist ( talk) 21:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Michael Nouri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article states that Nouri was born in 1945, yet later says he enlisted in the military in 1942. It should be rewritten to clarify what parts are describing his father, and which parts can be attributed to him.
(Comment added by Dfhawk)
The article Markus Hess is severely lacking in references, which is a problem given that it suggests that the subject is a criminal. What's the best approach to take here? Removing all of the unsourced material would leave virtually nothing. Cordless Larry ( talk) 19:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
This article needs a major review ASAP because it is on the front page of reddit. In particular the concern is over
sexual assualt section. Much of that section relies on a single source called The Inquisitr and that name alone should make one wary. The following text needs scrutinizing: it is alleged that Manning, while being examined by a female trainer, pulled down his shorts and sat on the trainer's face. He proceeded to rub his rectum and testicles on the woman's face until she was able to free herself from him
. I'd investigate this claim myself, but I don't have the time. This is a highly viewed article at the moment and it would be terrible for a BLP subject to be smeared because the article might use poor sourcing.
Which Hazel? (
talk) 22:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Rodrigo Constantino ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This page goes in-depth into the views of a political pundit who is a fringe figure at best. Within the body of the article are summarized three editorial pieces Rodrigo Constantino has written. This is not relevant or notable. This page is being used to flaunt the political views of some contributors. No other political pundit has large excerpts of his own writing on controversial topics and nothing else. I request this page be reduced to a stub and his views be summarized in one paragraph at most.
Tony Sparber ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Tony Sparber article is an orphan - how do I link it to other articles?
How can this article be improved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerlauren ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Great! I've added a few more books as sources and changed the wording a bit. Do you have specific suggestions? Writerlauren ( talk) 18:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Courtney Stadd ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
May require some cleanup as it pertains to convictions listed. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
This article has an editor who removes all content she didn't write (ARCIALIM). Have a look at the history.
Also I believe she has been removing comments from the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.100.132.176 ( talk) 00:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I removed Robert Lewis Dear's birthdate, but it got added back. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 02:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
This reads like an advertisement with no attempt at neutrality. Also, it is not written entirely in the third person eg. "In 2003, she set up my own PR and Communications business locally." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.250.25 ( talk) 23:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Feuerstein ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I am bringing this article here for the following reasons: 1. Feuerstein has been in the news a lot lately b/c of his campaign against Starbucks, which has led to lots of criticism of him in the media 2. Some nasty edits have been made to this article, including one that was apparently so bad it had to be suppressed 3. A recent probably GF edit added content sourced to sources (Addictinginfo and Patheos) of questionable reliability especially for a BLP. I would like to know if others think there is a problem w/anything in the article now. Everymorning (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Information about the shooter's religion has been repeatedly added to this article despite no credible source stating the shooter religion's anything to do with the shooting and is thus "a conjectural interpretation" and original research. ParkH.Davis ( talk) 08:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
T. V. John Langworthy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Was wondering if some others would mind taking a look at this BLP. Nothing in the article is supported by an inline citation even though there are lots of sources listed as references (not sure how many of them satisfy WP:RS or WP:SIGCOV though). Page was blanked (which was inappropriate) by another editor, but content does seem rather promotional and is pretty much the work of a SPA who may possibly be connected to Langworthy in some way. (Same editor is also working on a draft about Langworthy's record label). -- Marchjuly ( talk) 08:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Article, Mofford, a Verdun native who played for Monklands High School and the Verdun Maple Leafs, began his CFL career with the Montreal Alouettes,[1] playing 6 seasons and 79 games (up to 1979) and won 2 Grey Cup championships, in 1974 and 1977. He later joined the Ottawa Rough Riders for one season, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for two seasons, and returned to the Als in 1981, playing 3 games. His last year was 1982, when he played 4 games for the woeful Montreal Concordes.
Please change to: Mofford, a NDG native who played for Monklands High School and the Verdun Maple Leafs, began his CFL career with the Montreal Alouettes,[1] playing 6 seasons and 79 games (up to 1979) and won 2 Grey Cup championships, in 1974 and 1977. He later joined the Ottawa Rough Riders for one season, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for two seasons, and returned to the Als in 1981, playing 3 games. His last year was 1982, when he played 4 games for the woeful Montreal Concordes.
NDG Native not Verdun - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Stuart Mofford ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
http://www.hayhouseradio.com/#!/host/diane-ray this is Diane Ray of HayHouseRadio.com . The picture for Diane Ray american singer shows Diane Ray of Hay House. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=diane%20ray this picture is of the wrong person and needs to be removed. Please take this picture down in reference to Diane Ray the american singer. This is incorrect. sincerely, Diane Ray HayHouseRadio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.78.191.190 ( talk) 19:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Lawrence Khong ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I was watching the edit filter log when I saw the Lawrence Khong article appear. I reverted this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lawrence_Khong&diff=prev&oldid=693658418 because I thought it abandoned neutral point of view, but the other editor quickly reverted my revert back to his original statement and said it is neutral because the guy is homophobic. I want to head off an edit war and I am wondering who is more right, what is more neutral, the current revision or my reverted version of the other editor's version? Thanks. In veritas ( talk) 04:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Ion Croitoru ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) For those of you who don't read WT:PW (probably a great many), GaryColemanFan and I have been going back and forth for years. For my part, a lot of it has been criticism of blatant cherry-picking of sources and even more blatant trophy hunting, which is typically blown off in a derisive manner. The lead of this particular article ends with "On January 24, 2011, Croitoru was charged with first degree murder in connection with the 2008 execution of Jonathan Barber in Burnaby, British Columbia". Well, it's now nearly five years later. You have to go to the very bottom of the article to find anything about the events of the past five years, but does the reader really learn anything from that? In one paragraph, he was convicted of a crime in connection with Barber's death (but not first-degree murder, which also calls to mind the issue of undue weight in the lead) and is currently incarcerated, yet in the very next paragraph he "currently lives in Vancouver, British Columbia with his common-law wife and his two young sons" and is busy pursuing a career in the entertainment industry. So which is it? This isn't what I expect from either a BLP or a good article. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
That is one of the most obnoxious-looking things I have ever seen on Wikipedia. Looking at the frequency and placement of references in that short passage, it's pretty abundantly clear that the community is not assuming good faith when it comes to the intelligence of our readers, rather assuming that readers need to have their hands held every little last baby step along the way. To reiterate, is my attitude the real problem? I mean, it's trivially easy to find statements such as "The rest of you need to get off your high horse and understand that we're here for readers. Period." on various and sundry bully boards, but if we're categorically viewing readers as dumbed down and willing to accept whatever we offer them, do such statements really mean anything? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)The Pugh brothers, Jamin (Jay)[5] (born January 25,[6] 1984)[5] and Mark[7] (born January 17, 1985)[7]
Two editors are trying to put a violation of WP:BLP in the article, "2015 Minneapolis Shooting", named Mangokeylime and Mr. Granger. The first editor made the addition; the second, Granger, is trying to back him up. They want to include a statement that a BLM protestor later claimed to have 'heard the N-word' during a confrontation between apparently dozens of Black Lives Matter protestors and three white visitors to the protest. The person who was reported to have heard "the N-word" didn't say who, he believed, spoke that word. Yet, the reader would be left with the impression that the person who spoke the word must have been one of those three whites, rather than those dozens of BLM protestors: If it had been one of the BLM protestors, that usage wouldn't have been especially remarkable or significant, let alone controversial. So, the only purpose of including this statement in the article would be to give a false impression of what happened. So, I feel that has crossed the line into libel, or at least "False Light". Since those three visitors are still alive, and identifiable, I think WP:BLP applies. Further, Granger stated: "there seems to be consensus for including this. Please gain consensus for removing it before you do so again" But the edit had just been made by Mangokeylime, then reverted by me (following WP:BRD). Nobody else had spoken up to defend it. Clearly, nothing had happened for Granger to conclude "there seems to be consensus". I believe an edit-war was committed by Granger, when he immediately reverted my revert of the initial edit. Following WP:BRD would require that he begin with a discussion of the issue, rather than reverting my revert. Lurie2 ( talk) 22:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Davis (writer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hi!
Thank you so much in advance for reading. I'm looking to have a low quality warning removed from an entry.
I work at Epic Magazine, and I'm inquiring about the biography for one of our co-founders, Joshuah Davis (writer). Joshuah more than meets the notability criteria for a biographical entry (Josh is a major American journalist who has written articles that have become major motion pictures [1], and our company has been profiled in The New York Times [2]), but there's a warning atop the page about low quality. I cleaned up the text so that it has an objective tone and added several sources.
I'd be so appreciative if you could review the entry, and if you think it's appropriate delete the warning. And if there's anything else to be done to improve the page, please let me know.
Thanks again,
Charlie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicodemus Underwood ( talk • contribs) 00:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
References
WP:BLP viewers might like to cast an eye on List of plagiarism incidents. There are signs of political COI there. My view is that only plagiarism established by authoritative ( WP:RS) sources should be allowed. Unestablished allegations should not be permitted. Some editors claim that other Wikis are valid sources for a BLP. I disagree. Other editors may like to consider. Xxanthippe ( talk) 03:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC).
Hey guys, I wanted to get some extra eyes on the article for Marathon course-cutting. Long story short, I mentioned this here back in August because there were some SPAs trying to add a specific person to the article after the guy's article was deleted at AfD. The whole story with that was that this guy allegedly cheated on a marathon and the article came across to me like a pretty thinly veiled attack page made to shame him. While the evidence did look pretty incriminating, the problem is that the guy claimed his innocence (and as far as I know, still does). That posed a huge, HUGE BLP issue for obvious reasons and trying to shift everything to a different page didn't solve the issue. We've had people threaten legal action over less on here, so I can imagine that there would be people that'd be very unhappy with being included on such a negative list. Whether they did this or not is irrelevant - if they're not notable enough for their own articles then they don't belong on the article. Arguing that someone got coverage, no matter how heavy, over a short period of time isn't good enough in this type of situation given how harmful being included in a page like this could be, especially since this could fall under WP:NCRIME.
A look at the page itself showed that it was a catch all for anyone who got a smattering of news coverage for alleged or confessed cheating, which also posed a BLP issue as well. Oldelpaso actually voiced concern over this months before I came across the article as well. Myself and Collect ended up removing pretty much all but a very few instances from the article and at one point the revert war grew so bad that NeilN had to protect the page. He may have to do this again.
I would like to have some extra eyes on the article to prevent further revert attempts. If it's going to be like last time, then it's likely going to have some people trying to revert back to the old version. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 21:02, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
William Ackerman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Will Ackerman was born in Palo Alto, CA not in West Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.135.142.80 ( talk) 18:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. Can I have another set of eyes on this article? I made the following edit, here, using Stiki, after reading the underlying reference articles. The issue I had was threefold: First, the edit seemed to be drawing conclusions (in a negative fashion) from the underlying articles; Second, per BLP, allegations like this should be multi-sourced; and third, the edit does not make it clear that these are allegations, but asserts them to be facts. Another editor, Schwede66, has reverted twice, but has done the right thing and engaged on the talk page. Hopefully, we can hash it out there, but I wanted others who look over BLP's to take a look. I certainly want to know if folks think my interpratation is out of line. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 19:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
This could use a lot of oversight, and perhaps page protection if necessary. Especially in the last few days, this has been the subject of alternating bouts of vandalism and BLP violations, puffery and copyright violations, including edits by an eponymous account. Assistance appreciated. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 17:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
ASA Anime Production Company The Animation Studio is one of the leading distributors of anime and other foreign entertainment properties in all of North America — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.101.115 ( talk) 02:10, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
[Moved to WP:RSN to hopefully get more eyes on it] – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 23:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I am Kemi Omololu-Olunloyo of HNNAfrica.com and very angry at Wikipedia and seeking legal advice because I am being slandered and defamed on an encyclopedia trolls are allowed to edit. I noticed a Wikipedia article on me created sometimes this year. There are parts of it not accurate. I opened an account to be able to post this. I understand my profile is locked because you people have a troll and fighting problem. I read the talk page. Under Charges in Georgia and deportation from Canada my profile is linked to Newton County Sherrifs page on 2003 charges that were dropped 2010 after a Toronto Star story in 2009. I am not responsible for Newton County updating their database but my attorney has contacted them. Then there is somebody editing that page with a conflict of interest which should not be as I have a lot of trolls online. Many of these trolls are passing this info all over the net saying that I'm wanted. It is libelous and I want that link removed till Wikipedia verifies it themselves? Ododowiki ( talk) 15:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Looking for help on Karyn Calabrese. An IP user has reverted a BLP tag despite the article still suffering from poor sources. I am concerned that the IP user is practicing FanPOV, as past edits seems a bit more promotional to this article. There is also concern on this article for WP:FRINGE. Delta13C ( talk) 06:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Lucy Allan (politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
British MP has been accused of faking death threats against herself, and has (partially) denied this accusation. Nuances of the situation are being ignored by IPs who are changing the article to state the fakery as fact in Wikipedia's voice. Could use a few more eyes. Brustopher ( talk) 11:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
The other day I came across an article for a movie called, America: A Call to Greatness, that I'm 99% positive never actually existed (see my comment in the talk section for more details not related to BLPs). There are virtually no reliable citations in this article to date. I made an honest effort and wasn't able to find a single reliable source to verify that a film with this title was ever released in theaters or aired on TV. What's more, since 2011, it's been mentioned in the narrative and filmography of BLPs (and recently deceased persons) for many well-known celebrities with citations for the movie's amateurishly designed homepage, IMDb page and a YouTube video. Several users have attempted to delete the references, but almost all over them were reverted later and have remained since. This is only one of many dubious articles related to Warren H. Chaney that are edited by the same small number of folks. (See also BLPs on Warren H. Chaney and his wife, Deborah Winters, for more poorly sourced stuff. I'm not even up to scrutinizing their pages yet.) The reason I'm posting here is because there are references to this movie on lots of celebrity articles, so it will be time-consuming to delete them one by one, especially since this user has a habit of reverting edits. Can anyone guide me as to the best way to get remove all of the poorly sourced movie references on celeb pages? Do I just do it manually? Permstrump ( talk) 10:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
This article is a biography of a living person with no sources and is written in a promotional tone. I have requested its deletion multiple times, but the creator has removed the speedy deletion and proposed deletion templates and continues to do so even after warnings were left on his talk page. jBot-42 00:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBot-42 ( talk • contribs)
Update: Page has been deleted by User:Delldot. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 10:21, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This concerns the wikipedia page / biography of Campbell Newman /info/en/?search=Campbell_Newman
I have attempted to include relevant sourced and contextual information in this wikipedia page, which has been reverted three times without explanation. The last editor which reverted the entry I've attempted to make threatened me with an editing ban, but did not offer any explanation of why the information was not relevant.
Please review this entry, the revision history, and the talk page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Campbell_Newman&diff=694762692&oldid=694744810
The information I am attempting to include is as follows :
On October 24th, 2014, according to reports, Newman threatened to have police shoot live bullets at protesters at the upcoming G20 summit in Brisbane. At the time, Newman said "It’s like when you have guests at your house. If your kids start misbehaving then you discipline them, . . . Only this time it will be with a high-powered sniper bullet to the brain, instead of a rubber hose to the back of the legs." http://www.betootaadvocate.com/uncategorized/premier-newman-orders-g20-cops-to-shoot-on-sight/
This information is sourced and relevant to the section on Newman's term of office, as he was not re-elected in the following election (probably due to a drop in popularity for acts similar to this). http://auspol.wikia.com/wiki/How_evil_is_Campbell_Newman%3F I should note that the entire biographical entry on Newman has virtually none of the content which the previous cite has. It suggests to me that the entry is being edited or controlled by someone with a political agenda, and that such control is not objective and therefore violates Wikipedia guidelines.
I find it odd that an editor would deliberately censor this information which seems to me highly relevant when one looks at the other kinds of information in that section of the wikipedia entry on Newman.
Please respond or mediate or intervene in this dispute. I will not undo this censorship, but it seems to me that censorship of relevant information is exactly what wikipedia editors should not do.
-end — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.74.253.202 ( talk) 12:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
John Glen (politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Qpzmq has consistently reverted to a previous edit on John Glen's page, including a biased description of Mr Glen's beliefs, and disproportionate weight given to his position on the same-sex marriage bill.
Obviously all of Mr Glen's voting positions are a matter of public record, but it is evident that this article is not attempting to be based on a NPOV. In order to avoid a conflict of interest, or edit warring, we don't wish to continuously delete or edit the article, and would be very grateful for any help in restoring it to be a factual rather than ideological biography
WMinster-2015 ( talk) 12:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I recently copy edited this article with regards to general aspects such as referencing and content updates. Upon doing so, Nomoskedasticity reinstated a contentious sentence from the lede - the rest was left per my version. A friendly yet lively discussion ensued on the article's talk page involving a few of the article's recurring editors. I'm posting here in the hopes of garnering much needed feedback when the aforementioned discussion seems to be going nowhere, or rather somewhere unproductive. I'll try to summarise both sides of the debate, even though one of my main concerns hasn't been discussed at all and considering I am mostly unfamiliar with previous edits to the article). The sentence removed by me was "His business practices have been described by detractors as having the characteristics of a vulture fund, a characterization which Singer rejects." Secondly, 67% of the section treating his company, Elliott Management, is about 3 minor occurrences involving distressed debt ( WP:CRITICISM).
My arguments were:
Arguments for inclusion of the sentence as proposed by Nomoskedasticity, NickCT and SegataSanshiro1 - note there weren't any comments besides those 3 other editors':
Finally, note my brief counterarguments provided previously are not intended to incline readers my way, it's just a simple way of not having to post many replies a posteriori. Please feel free to add counterarguments next to my arguments above, or arguments from any side I forgot to relay (discerning content in long discussions is quite a feat). I think we all agree on the article's page that certain bits could use copy editing, we've all stated that in the talk page. It's good that I've managed to tweak it a bit and finally remove the ominous NPOV tag, even though it still needs some work. I look forward to reading others' opinions and seeing how we can move forward. Thank you all. Regards, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad this issue is being discussed and would ask users to focus on the issue at hand rather then deviating away so uninvolved editors can read through this post with ease. The fact that we are using a derogatory term to describe an individual who's business practices are 100% legal is absurd. Yes, there are articles (the majority of which are pretty heavily biased) use the term in reference to Elliott Management, his company, but to attack the subject with the term "vulture" is highly unencyclopedic. Comparing someone to a bird of prey that feeds on the death of a sick or injured animal or person is incredibly disparaging. Singer, or any hedge fund manager for that matter, would never deem themselves or their business practices as having the traits of a "vulture fund". This content should not be included in a BLP, especially in the lead section. I look forward to hearing other uninvolved editors' input. Meatsgains ( talk) 02:44, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Juan Domínguez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please make correction on your search engine page for Juan Dominguez fight on 12-8-2015, who did not pass on. Thank God — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.37.24 ( talk) 13:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Jim Fiore ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article has a lot of issues: it does not have a neutral point of view, includes unsourced information, is imbalanced, and generally doesn't follow many additional guidelines of Wikipedia. The page is clearly being used for disparagement of a living person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:6B41:3800:C81F:A6F2:62E6:CEEB ( talk) 04:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Ali Olomi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please change the name Ali A. Olomi to Ali Olomi. They are 2 different people. Currently you have Ali A. Olomi listed but with the incorrect Biography. You have Ali Olomi who's an Actor's Biography here. Please change the name Ali A. Olomi to Ali Olomi
Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Movieindustry ( talk • contribs) 08:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Aishveryaa Nidhi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article about Aishveryaa Nidhi is created by herself and her friends for self publicity. This article should reported and removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.134.81 ( talk) 11:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Alistair Carmichael ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is now a controversial subject, can it be be semi protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAEmmerson ( talk • contribs) 11:10, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Her middle name should be spelled "Anne" with an e. Mitzi.humphrey ( talk) 19:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Suzanne Nossel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm troubled by this para, which makes some strong assertions that aren't backed up with citations and veers toward political opinion.
Nossel has been credited with coining the term "Smart Power", in the title of a 2004 Foreign Affairs article in which she proposed a policy of liberal internationalism, outlining the concept of the U.S. using military power as well as other forms of “soft power.” It was seen as a justification for US imperialism and its attempt to maintain world hegemony - this time dressed up in the language of humanitarianism. [citation?] No wonder the term was popularized by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in both her nomination hearing to become Secretary of State and in her farewell address upon leaving the State Department, and has since become a defining feature of U.S. foreign policy. [citation?]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssata ( talk • contribs) 15:45, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to be away from Wikipedia for a few days, but wanted to alert others to this source as a possible BLP violation. This source isn't about Chopra per say, but about identification of what the authors term "pseudo-profund bullshit". The authors of the source note that:
An editor suggests the content is coatrack content. He reduced the inflammatory nature of the original edit to the Chopra article, and also moved the content out of the lead.
I question whether this content and source has any place in the Chopra article since it is not providing any information about Chopra, and agree that it is coatrack content. As the authors themselves noted:
The study: [32]
The content presently in the article: [33]
"A 2015 paper examining "the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit" used Chopra's Twitter feed as the canonical example, and compared this with fake Chopra quotes generated by a spoof website.[123][124][125]"
Might be a good idea if uninvolved editors took a look.( Littleolive oil ( talk) 04:44, 12 December 2015 (UTC))
You have the dancing dolls of jackson mississippi picture for dancing dolls of japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B8EC:120:A885:B5BC:1DCA:636B ( talk) 01:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
On October 13 a bot put 109 BLP articles into category "Climate Change Deniers" due to a CFD discussion. Number of editors participating: 10. Number of notices on the BLP talk pages: zero. Number of reliable sources cited to support the changes: zero. I claim that WP:BLPN is the appropriate discussion venue for such a large set of BLP changes, and that labelling people "deniers" is not appropriate without a strong consensus of subject-specific sources plus a strong consensus of editors who have actually seen the BLPs and are aware of previous discussions on the BLPs' talk pages and are aware of WP:AE. The articles are: Khabibullo Abdussamatov Stuart Agnew Syun-Ichi Akasofu Claude Allègre J. Scott Armstrong Michele Bachmann Sallie Baliunas Timothy Ball Robert Balling Joseph Bast Joe Bastardi Godfrey Bloom Joe Barton David Bellamy Maxime Bernier Marsha Blackburn Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen Christopher Booker Barry Brill Paul Broun Douglas Carswell Robert M. Carter John Christy Petr Chylek Ian Clark (geologist) John Coleman (news weathercaster) Piers Corbyn Ann Coulter Vincent Courtillot Ken Cuccinelli Judith Curry Edward E. David Jr. James Delingpole Martin Durkin (television director) Myron Ebell Nigel Farage Chris de Freitas David Deming David Douglass Don Easterbrook David Evans (mathematician and engineer) Ivar Giaever Steven Goddard Vincent R. Gray William M. Gray William Happer John Hawkins (columnist) Rodney Hide Ole Humlum David Icke Craig D. Idso Keith E. Idso Sherwood B. Idso Jim Inhofe Wibjörn Karlén Michael Kelly (physicist) Steve King William Kininmonth (meteorologist) Václav Klaus Steven E. Koonin Lyndon LaRouche David Legates Lucia Liljegren Rush Limbaugh Richard Lindzen Scott Lively Craig Loehle Anthony Lupo Bob Lutz (businessman) Steve McIntyre Ross McKitrick Patrick Michaels Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley Andrew Montford Patrick Moore (environmentalist) Marc Morano Nils-Axel Mörner Tad Murty Joanne Nova Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) Vladimir Paar Sarah Palin Garth Paltridge Tim Patterson Melanie Phillips Ian Plimer Denis Rancourt Arthur B. Robinson Marco Rubio Burt Rutan Pat Sajak Murry Salby Nicola Scafetta Harrison Schmitt Tom Segalstad Nir Shaviv Fred Singer Willie Soon Roy Spencer (scientist) Bret Stephens Peter Stilbs Philip Stott Henrik Svensmark George H. Taylor Hendrik Tennekes Anastasios Tsonis Fritz Vahrenholt Jan Veizer Anthony Watts (blogger). I will place appropriate notices on the talk pages. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 17:23, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
The articles were already in the category Climate change skeptics, which was renamed to deniers. Frankly, I think that the inclusion of most of those people in the original category was not controversial. What is controversial is the new category name, which sounds pejorative. I don't see this is a BLP issue. I didn't participate (or even know about) the original discussion. But to the extent that the new category name is pejorative, I'd certainly vote to revert to the skeptic category name. M.boli ( talk) 18:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps some sort of climate category might be okay, but it's very difficult. If someone denies that the US can unilaterally take action to stop climate change, does that make them a "denier"? If they deny that climate change would be a totally bad thing, without any silver lining, does that make them a denier? If they acknowledge climate change but attribute 51% of it to non-human causes, are they a "denier"? Maybe a better category would be "people with a position on climate change". Anythingyouwant ( talk) 18:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
"...advocates for climate change denial",
"...who denies climate change",
"...rejects the scientific consensus on...", etc. However, that's just a personal preference. Our sources are extremely clear on these articles that the subject denies climate change. Our sources are also very clear that the term "skeptic" is incorrect, and intentionally misleading. I'm frustrated that Pete is forum shopping; this discussion has been had many times, twice now at CfD, so Pete is trying somewhere new to get a different result. Nearly everything he's said in his first post here is untrue to some degree. If anyone wants the cat renamed, we can have that conversation (that's why WP:CfD exists), but please look into the sourcing and the BLPs first. Try Anthony Watts (blogger) for an example, and investigate the talk page and sources. As our sources there indicate clearly, "skeptic" is absolutely not the right word. — Jess· Δ ♥ 19:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Those who hold a position here because of what they "know to be the truth" are precisely analogous to those who favour or oppose any "truth" in the first place. Rather, we should divorce this from what we "know" or "believe" or "believe we know" and stick strictly to the precept that people should not be categorized for their beliefs except on the basis of categories they place themselves in by stating their own self-categorization.
Else we are as bad as any who have labeled folks on the basis of beliefs as "heretics" or "witches" or any other category susceptible of "guilt by association" tactics. I, for one, have always opposed "guilt by association" arguments on Wikipedia and in real life, and if I be the only one left in the world holding that personal belief, if I be the only one in the world in my self-identification in the category of "do not classify people because they differ from you in religion or any other belief at all" then I proudly assert my position in that category. Collect ( talk) 21:00, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Sadly, Wikipedia is turning its back on scientific source in favour of becoming a poor imitation of Conservapedia. Far-right politicians and their conspiracy theories are being given undue weight, fringe theories being promoted. AusLondonder ( talk) 22:51, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
I intend to go to WP:ANRFC and ask "Closure by admin requested for WP:BLPN discussion 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once", on Thursday November 12, unless other editors say more time is needed. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 18:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Just an update but the category at CSD has been deleted. As such, this can possibly be closed as moot. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 02:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
An editor is making edits that call Amy Schumer a racist, by removing RS-cited statements that balance an op-ed writer's WP:FRINGE claim that she is a racist.
Calling a living person a racist by removing cited evidence to the contrary seems a WP:BLP vio — yet this editor claims it's a BLP vio not to say she's a racist. I really don't understand, unless it's someone who hates Schumer's politics. She's anti-gun, and that riles certain people. Please see Talk:Amy Schumer/Archive 1#BLP. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Can you erase the article of Jussi Näppilä (finnish footballer) born 1987.
Article is poorly sourced and includes false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:999:20:710F:221:E9FF:FEDE:C147 ( talk) 00:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Jonathan Karl ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The very short read required to find the grossly hateful comments made on your Johnathan Karl page would prove quite easy. Nothing more needs said. This is a hit piece pain and simple. Pages like this gives Wikipedia a very bad name.
Martin Carlson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.45.223.53 ( talk) 04:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Steve Comisar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Experienced editors, please keep an eye on this biography. Comisar is an imprisoned con man who is trying to reshape his biography in a promotional fashion. I have been personally threatened for trying to prevent that from happening. Thanks for your help. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:23, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Accusations by his ex-wife that he molested his daughter were recently added in a section called Private life. I was hoping to talk about it with whoever answers my Request Edit, but I realize the queue is about 6-8 months backlogged.
According to The Los Angeles Times no charges were ever filed. The DA's report noted a lack of evidence and that the accusations were made by his ex-wife one day after he filed for divorce and began a custody battle.
I thought WP:BLPCRIME prevented us from covering crimes where no charges were filed? Please politely correct me if I am wrong. I appreciate your time and attention in advance. Please note my COI disclosure. David King, Ethical Wiki ( Talk) 18:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Carlos Alvarez-Aranyos ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The sourcing is poor. There are no verifiable sources of any objectivity. It reeks of self-promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.156.4.252 ( talk) 20:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Protection was removed from this article only in the last hour or so, since when there have been several unconstructive edits. Eagleash ( talk) 02:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I had WINK-TV on my watchlist because of a non-free image whose non-free use rationale was disputed. Earlier today, an new editor Floridanewsgator added quite an extensive new section called WINK-TV#"Code of Ethics" Lawsuit to the article at a fairly prominent location. This addition is the first an only edit made by this Floridanewsgator and describes a legal dispute between the station and one of its former reporters. The section goes into quite a bit of detail and reliable sources are provided, but there are also quite a few names of real people being mentioned who seem to be involved in ongoing legal proceedings. Could someone more familiar with this type of content take a closer look and see if there are any WP:BLP or other WP:UNDUE problems. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:21, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
This entire article is written by one user, which in the highest probability is the person himself. Totally biased and written in a way to cheat the public. Admins and members please have a look and take action as suitable. 121.244.94.9 ( talk) 08:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Can someone please update the Ralph Doubell image to an image of Ralph Doubell. Thanks,
James Doubell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesdoubell ( talk • contribs) 04:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
The Australian middle-distance runner Ralph Doubell is training on the running track for the Olympic competitions. The athlete shall end the Mexican Olympic games with two victories in the 800 metres final race: he shall win a medal gold and set a new world-record time. Mexico City (Mexico), October 1968.Do you have any evidence to suggest this caption is incorrect? clpo13( talk) 06:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to disprove that image other than to provide another source such as [ [1]], that shows a picture of my father.
Subject is not relevent.
Subject is a tabloid journalist that prank called a man running fir a congressional office job in Wisconsin USA. The call did not impede the man from winning the election. (May deserve a small foot note in the elected official's subject page)
Later subject Ian Murphy ran for one of the 27 congressional jobs in NY. In that election this subject was not on a major party and recieved the least number of votes of all candidates scarcely one percent of votes cast and less than one percent of registered voters. (Not relevent in any context) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.59.126 ( talk) 04:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I would like to bring to the attention of wikipedia user DAJF, who single handedly is responsible for 20% of the edits on the page of Fiona Graham. Unfortunately, all these edits were made either to either publish information that would her the subject (personally and professionally), or revert any "positive" edits. Considering his contributions to wikipedia, for the last nine years, have majoritarily been about her, and the subject of his edits, I think we should look into his impartiality toward 2, and, if needed, prevent him from editing the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriss1991 ( talk • contribs) 00:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Biased interpretation of a particular interview of the Nobel Laurate Aziz Sancar in Turkish language used in his biography. /info/en/?search=Talk:Aziz_Sancar#Controversies_section . Its' flowing with opinions but not with clear definitions. Until a full; reliable English translation of the said interview is provided to be discussed upon; talk is bordering "libel" and "slander". WP:BLPSOURCES and importantly; whole interview was skimmed down to one single biased comment. Mulkhan ( talk) 23:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Until we have reliable sourcing about this as being a controversy, I thin is better left out of the article. It's a BLP and this feels like negative synthesis to me. I've read the talk page discussion as well and the English source. Need source to establish that it's true and significant, otherwise this is an editor's original research. SageRad ( talk) 09:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Please help me to understand this dispute. I cannot read Turkish, but i have been reading translations of stories about Sancar's interview, and i can't make heads or tails of it. Would both of the main disputants in this conflict please describe, in brief and simple terms, what Sancar said, and why it is important or not, and what it really means? It would help me, as i am sure it would help others who may be observing this dialogue without full understanding. Thank you. SageRad ( talk) 00:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Note that user Mulkhan is blocked and there is discussion at their talk page here on which i have added my opinion of this very distasteful situation. SageRad ( talk) 20:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
[Bhavna Limbachia] this page has incorrect data on and could be harmful to the person that this page is about. Under Rule, Remove contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced
The date on the page, [Bhavna Limbachia] is
is unsourced or poorly sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robson6244 ( talk • contribs) 17:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Twice now, User:Wnt has chosen to bring up the name of a living person in connection with various odd political statements about procedures that he imagines could have been carried out in response to a question on chimerism that has nothing to do with the person he mentions. I suggest Wnt be admonished, and that the edits be revdeleted, as they have no relevance to the topic at hand and are based on unproven accusations not mentioned in that person's article at WP.
μηδείς ( talk) 01:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
1) The current content of a Wikipedia article is not supposed to be some kind of limit on what can be said about the topic elsewhere. For example, people are supposed to be able to propose additions to articles on their talk pages.
2) [The] abortion was the source of national commentary during the 1990s. I provided a reference about it in the second edit just to be clear about that, but to people in the U.S. it is well known.
3) The Refdesk is supposed to be a place where people can use hypothetical examples with real-world relevance to emphasize the impact of new technologies. I was not claiming to speak of things that had been done, but only of things that could be done. A technique to determine the paternity of the fetus retroactively from the mother's blood might have been of interest to some of the Republicans who so doggedly dogged the president for so long. In any case, it illustrates how the ability to find out a fetus' paternity could have far-reaching social effects.
Wnt ( talk) 03:15, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Thierry Morand ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The English needs revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.229.205 ( talk) 13:27, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Calvin Cheng ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article has a bunch of issues with NPOV, balance and verifiabilty. There is an aggresive editor who undoes attempts to fix the article.
Ismahil Akinade ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The correct version of events has been changed. It can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Ismahil_Akinade&direction=prev&oldid=689268199
All the information regarding his convictions are 100% accurate. Please amend accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.127.40 ( talk) 12:21, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Susan Bitter Smith ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) There seems to be people adding and removing negative information from this article. Needless to say, I am concerned. -- I dream of horses ( My edits) @ 05:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Jaycen Joshua ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Page reads like a resume, no citations to prove work, singular editor making all changes probably a COI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quixoticzoomie ( talk • contribs) 21:33, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Recently the article for Huccha Venkat was deleted several times, to the point where it was salted. It was eventually restored and moved to Draft:Huccha Venkat, but there's still somewhat of an issue here, predominantly from a BLP angle. The guy has been in a film that looks to be potentially notable and he was on Big Brother, so notability is likely established - I haven't taken a close look at this yet.
The main issue is that the guy is primarily known for being controversial. His latest thing is that he said some allegedly offensive stuff to another person on a panel discussion, which led to him being arrested. His lawyer is now claiming that he's mentally ill. Given that this is all due to controversy and there's allegations of mental instability, I want to make sure that this is 100% kosher before going forward. I'm fairly certain that if this was accepted right now, it'd probably go straight to AfD where the BLP issues could prove fatal if not discussed beforehand. I'm leaning towards this guy probably meriting an article since there is a lot of coverage (his film could probably be merged into his page, making notability easier to establish), but the possible BLP concerns are troubling.
I've posted at WP:INDIA about this since there will be some issue with finding sources since India-related sources won't come up in a basic Google search. I'd recommend using this search engine to find things. It's one that was made by the India WP specifically for use on here. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 12:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
This article has reference more than 20 news article. Huccha Venkat is a personality, where its for right or wrong or mixture of both. The article is relevant. It needs to be instated without further due and dragging to different forums. Please reinstate the article, ASAP. Rajannamysore ( talk) 17:58, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary DeMoss (3rd nomination).
Comment there, if you will.
jps ( talk) 17:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
COULD SOMEONE FIX THE TOP PART OF THE PROFILE FOR "KARUNASENA KODITUWAKKU"? WHEN I EDITED IT ALL GOT MIXED UP JUST THE TOP PART. THE BOTTOM AREA IS ALL UPTO DATE
THANKS
D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.42.255.219 ( talk) 19:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Lorenzo Giuliano, commonly known by his stage name Haxent, is an international music producer and Dj. Supported on BBC Radio 1 by Chuckie & many others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Areyoureadyec ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
hi the mark evanier article publications section is missing a lot of groos. dark horse & other groos. -groo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.161.80.195 ( talk) 08:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Prejudicially negative, likely reputation-damaging characterizations re political views inserted into this short article here: Special:Diff/651182580 and here: Special:Diff/691706416 - IslandGyrl ( talk) 06:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
BBC story on the event Only in death does duty end ( talk) 15:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Asking for more eyes at Max Blumenthal ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which for more than a month has seen IP editors trying to add unsourced (or poorly sourced) information to the BLP. Today a sockpuppet of perma-blocked editor NoCal100 ( talk · contribs) joined the fray. Thank you. 107.10.236.42 ( talk) 21:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
I've reverted this article to a version from 9 months ago due to the new content containing large amounts of negative or questionable material, which was mostly self-sourced or sourced to YouTube and other user contributed media. I'd appreciate any third party review. Prodego talk 23:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I've since replied in full.
I'm glad to know what does need reliable sources, and what can be sourced by more direct sources. We can, at least, support the career section for a large part, to which I'm fairly happy.
It seems on the page right now, one such source seems to be an interview. Does wikipedia accept interviews as viable references, if from a credible source?--
Kizzycocoa (
talk) 12:51, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Just letting people know I pinged the Video game WikiProject on the discussion. GamerPro64 04:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I have left a (large) response on Talk:Jim Sterling#WP:BLP violations and sourcing. Prodego talk 02:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Article still has a somewhat promotional style.
E.g. "John's vocal tracks are a list of hits including ... all the way down to an in progress track ... with David Guetta": requires citation. It also seems implausible that a track can be a hit while it is still "in progress."
E.g. "At 13, Martin bought a guitar, formed a band, and began playing Nirvana covers." Requires citation.
"John Martin is now working on his debut album which was planned to be released in August 2014, however it has been delayed awaiting a massive new collaboration before the release" is clearly promotional and requires citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.174.182.74 ( talk) 01:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
One editor ( Jbhunley) has opined at Talk:Rick Alan Ross:
Is this precisely in accord with WP:BLP? I had rather thought this policy says to edit conservatively, and stick primarily to fact. Here the interesting argument is made specifically that we should include "unflattering viewpoints" in order to tell readers what the "truth" is (i.e. that readers are not able to look at facts and decide what the truth is on their own without us guiding them)? And does this concept relate to COI policy in any way? Collect ( talk) 21:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
If you have a question about what I mean in my statement ask me on the fricking talk page as opposed to scurrying to a noticeboard. I do not know if you simply misunderstand the conversation I have been having with Rick Alan Ross over a period of months or if you simply like taking quotes out of context for some perverse reasons of your own.How are the opinions of other professionals and academics - as near as I see the only other professional commentary on your activities - a WP:FRINGE theory?? History is the analysis of facts and learned commentary is how Wikipedia adduces what is important and what should be included. Mere recitation of 'facts' in not a service to our readers. We do not play the game of 'present the facts and let people figure it out themselves'. Wikipedia presents what competent and appropriate commentators have to say about a matter because they are the ones best qualified to draw conclusions or comment on an issue. Avoiding, suppressing or minimizing the views of a significant yet unflattering viewpoint is whitewashing and why we have a WP:COI policy.
Also, if you wish to discuss me at a noticeboard please have the minimal courtesy to notify me on my talk page. It is a little thing but the discourtesy reflects poorly on you. Again, if you have questions about what I have said - ask me. Jbh Talk 22:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I will go post a notice about this discussion on the article talk page so the others can chime in if they want. I know you prefer to carry on with your little noticeboard point making exercises without letting others who are involved in the matter even know a discussion is ongoing so sorry for cramping your style. Jbh Talk 22:42, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Now, enough of this. Would you care to discuss your misunderstanding of what I said on the article talk page - you know, ask me what I was talking about - or would that not fit with whatever your purpose for starting this thread is? Jbh Talk 23:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Per NPOV, in Wikipedia we report on significant viewpoints, not just facts. In BLPs we edit conservatively, but NPOV is non-negotiable. So if there are unflattering viewpoints that are significant, we report them. - Cwobeel (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Jbh Talk 23:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)My statement was in response to the proposed edits in the section above. There exists significant WP:RS commentary which analyses and discusses the results/outcome of the Waco siege and Rick Ross's participation. Simply stating 'fact' without analysis is not what we do when there is RS analysis to discuss. Whether the analysis is flattering to the subject or not is irrelevant only whether it is a significant viewpoint offered by mainstream authors. To quote from WP:BLP "Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone." This is not talking about the 'mere recitation of facts' it is talking about proportionate reporting of significant opinions represented in reliable sources. Do you claim we should forgo the reporting of relevant analysis and significant opinion and merely report 'facts'? If so, please support your position with policy. Cheers. [10]
This should be closed before it degenerates further - the meaning of JBH's comment is clear (and yes, compliant with guidelines). I doubt Collect would have bothered to even bring this here if he didn't have a long-standing grudge against JBH - and noticeboards shouldn't be used to further a petty feud. Fyddlestix ( talk) 01:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
WP:DENY Gamaliel ( talk) 03:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I am posting, with permission, the following e-mail from blocked user Greg Kohs: " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Carrite/ACE2015&diff=next&oldid=692191767 User:Kevin Gorman engages (for the third time) in a violation of WP:BLP. He accuses me of "harassment", with no evidence to back up the claim. Online harassment is a criminal act in many jurisdictions, so this is clearly a problem vis-a-vis WP:BLP." End of e-mail.-- ukexpat ( talk) 17:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
|
Persistent COI editing to make this a puffy resume. Probably involves WP:MULTIPLE. Help would be appreciated. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:21, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
This has been worked up into a lengthy and much-sourced piece pertaining to conditions in Nigeria, much of which doesn't relate directly to the biography. Appears to have become an advocacy vehicle. I suspect a lot of the article can be cut, but since it's profusely referenced, someone is likely to raise a fuss, and if I go in and shear it as an IP, there's a decent chance I'll be tagged for vandalism. I've templated it for several concerns. Thoughts welcome. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 21:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Andrew Glover (composer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.
The element about supposed bNP membership is liablous and tehrefore should be removed from the article. Some on Wiki appear to have a vendetta and not an impartial stance or opinion in this matter. Leave the item out of teh article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.181.171 ( talk) 18:36, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Ariel Fernandez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I recently joined Wikipedia because I felt I could contribute with my expertise in stat mech. About a year ago, I came across the work of Ariel Fernandez and thought it was pretty cool stuff. When I recently looked it up in Wikipedia I noticed it was underplayed or missing. I tried to fix that, and a bunch of people instantly showed up and almost cut my head off. Then I tried to fix the Fernandez page and realized I was blocked. Then I joined the Talk page and was immediately accused of being a puppet of Fernandez. The attack came from User:Molevol1234 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). This person surely holds a grudge against Fernandez. He seems full of hatred and eager to destroy Fernandez. Everyone who sides with Fernandez seems to be accused of sock puppetry, whatever that is. For the record, I never met Fernandez. In fact I thought Fernandez was a woman since the first name suggests so, and became aware that he is a man when I searched in Wiki. It is obvious to me and to everybody I know that Fernandez has done much more in his career than getting two papers questioned or a paper with significant overlap. Give me a break! Why are you overplaying this? I read the Chronicle of Higher Education. It is obvious that Retraction Watch told the writer what to say, and the article is not even about Fernandez. There are people with more than 10 retractions for false data not even mentioned. One guy in Japan has 187 retractions (and counting). Not a word about him. There is not a shred of evidence pointing to misconduct or wrongdoing in Fernandez record, none in the public domain. I have never seen anything like this. Someone should fix this article. Spinrade ( talk) 16:22, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Jahquel "Jah" Goss (born May 6, 1999) is an American basketball player who is currently attending high school at the Eveyln Mack Academy in Charlotte, North Carolina. Jahquel previously attended Mott Haven Campus in Bronx, New York. Goss is a five-star recruit and is generally seen as top 10 best overall recruit in the 2018 Class by most basketball recruiting services. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyc Top100 Players ( talk • contribs) 02:42, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Gregory Baum ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I deleted the first paragraph of the page on Canadian theologian, Gregory Baum (Edited March 2014). It was libelous. Baum has never been excommunicated from the Catholic Church. He did not divorce Shirley Flynn (she died as his wife several years ago). Every couple of years this libelous, inaccurate, and insulting material is added to this page either by Monseigneur Foy, or his friends. These allegations need to be substantiated--which they cannot be since they are false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firstnobletruth ( talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Laurence Brahm ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
From a cursory reading of this over-long article it is clearly mostly written by the subject and/or groomed by him to remove any criticism. The article's main named contributor is "LBwikiacct", a user who has only edited this page, and a few other accounts (Shambhalahouse, AfricanConsensus) who also seem likely to be aliases of the subject. Their purpose is only to promote Brahm's image and career. 202.81.248.186 ( talk) 12:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Jesse Petrilla ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can editors please look at this article and see if further changes are necessary? On one hand we have an IP editor committing BLP violations and on the other we very likely have COI editing. I've removed the obvious BLP violations but haven't reverted to Martel10732's version as that also has issues. -- NeilN talk to me 01:59, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia page of Prashant Kishor shows wrong data. He never worked for WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION (WHO). He was born in 1977.
Currently 2 authors are trying to edit the content:
indopug is a regular editor in wiki and uses newspaper articles as reference for his content; whereas Paroma Bhat works with Prashant Kishor and can provide valid proof for the content.
Number of changes version reversions has increased more than 3 times. Can you please help in providing a solution for this?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasank86 ( talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Ketan Ramanlal Bulsara ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone please take a look at this, including the edit history. Thanks. Doug Weller ( talk) 20:30, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
The PROD didn't work. I put it up for AFD. I found out today it was previously deleted. DreamGuy ( talk) 16:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Sabrina Erdely ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Can someone clean up this article fast, it's filled to the brim with trash. I'd do it myself but I have to go somewhere ASAP. Brustopher ( talk) 23:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Brian Bonner (linebacker) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article should fail PROC:BLP, but was created before cutoff date and has a couple awful parenthetical citations. I think the article meets WP:ATHLETE, so I did not consider it for deletion. There are stale cleanup tags from 2012. Anyone interested in improving this article? Delta13C ( talk) 02:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Please join the discussion about the appropriateness of utilizing a mug shot as the primary identification image at : Talk:Kent_Hovind#Mug_shot_redux -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Andrew Wilkinson (Canadian politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A user whose name is User:Penzerandrew, and thus has a possible but not confirmed WP:COI, has been persistently editing Andrew Wilkinson (Canadian politician) in recent weeks to bury any acknowledgement whatsoever of a reported controversy. This has also included the deliberate borking of reference templates to any media coverage of that controversy which remained in the article after the controversy itself was scrubbed — for example, their most recent edit stripped any portion of the "cite news" template from reference #4 that would actually have identified the specific news article being cited (the problem being that the article's title directly makes reference to the controversy), while leaving the remainder in place as an unlinked and untitled reference that was now formatted as a nonexistent "cite ork" template instead. But breaking reference templates is obviously not appropriate behaviour on Wikipedia regardless of the includability or excludability of the controversy itself.
I've placed temporary protection on the article twice now (semi wasn't suitable, as the editor has already surpassed autoconfirmed), but obviously don't want to indef it if I don't absolutely have to — but the user's persistence suggests that the content in question should be reviewed for WP:BLP compliance nonetheless and/or that the user should be blocked for vandalism if necessary. So I wanted to ask if somebody who hasn't already been involved with the matter could review whether it belongs there or not. Thanks. Bearcat ( talk) 20:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Arthur Chu ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
See this discussiom for a series of attack on Arthur Chu. Please retract those negative attacks against him. 166.170.48.13 ( talk) 00:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Mike Turzai ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Wikipedia article devoted to Mike Terzai seems strongly biased. It has a distinctly glorified and propagandistic tone. There have only been a few editors to this page, and I presume those who would take the time to write it are the same people who take an interest in (and support) this politician, although whether or not they are affiliated with the subject of the article, I cannot say. Nevertheless, there is a strikingly uncommon use of adjectives describing the candidate and his actions. As with any article about a sitting politician, there is bound to be some subjectivity, but this is to be minimized. In this case, there would seem outright bias. At the least, there should be a disclaimer before this article and a suggestion for further editing.
Elizabeth Holmes ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
BLP violations galore, as well as WP:PEACOCK. Additional eyes would be welcome. - Cwobeel (talk) 17:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Two issue with this bio: the first is whether the subject, a victim of a shark attack, is notable for this incident alone--if not, AfD seems like an appropriate process. The second is that the article here appears to have been created by the author of a new book on Ms. Moore, so WP:COI is an obvious concern. Further scrutiny welcome. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Robin Spencer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Limhey and I have been having a dispute about a section in the Robin Spencer article concerning his role as a prosecutor in the Sally Clark case. This is how the section looked before I removed much of it on BLP grounds. [14] I took the view that the section was non-neutral and unduly long, and appeared to be an attempt to made Spencer look bad. Limhey disagreed.
My specific concerns included:
In response to Limhey's suggestion that I was trying to "sanitise" the article, I noted that some of the material I removed could perhaps be included if rewritten in a neutral and concise manner, but that I did not attempt to do so because I did not have access to the necessary sources. I also stated that I was open to the inclusion of other relevant material, such as details about the particular misconduct charges that were filed against Spencer.
I suggested we take the matter here for some more opinions, and I would be grateful for comments. Neljack ( talk) 22:54, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
This is from a COI editing problem reported at WP:COIN#FFBFFB.
Chris Christian seems to have problems. It claims he's won several Grammy awards, yet I can't find them in the official Grammy database. [15]. Citations at both Chris Christian and Home Sweet Home Records are very weak. Google searches are not bringing up reliable third party sources. A Grammy-winning musician should have more press visibility than this. Am I missing something, or is something badly wrong with these articles? Help requested from someone who does music articles. Thanks. John Nagle ( talk) 23:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
The article on Marc Randazza ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) could do with some scrutiny. It seems real-world arbitration is spilling over on Wikipedia. Uninvolved editors would be welcome to make sure we neutrally summarize what reliable sources report. See also Talk:Marc Randazza#BLP Violation and SPA. Huon ( talk) 23:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Mudar Zahran ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is persistent edit-warring at Mudar Zahran over BLP issues, involving (among others) an IP editor who claims to be the article's subject. More eyes would be helpful, especially editors who can read Arabic sources. Full protection may be appropriate. 66.87.115.139 ( talk) 15:20, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Gwen Stefani ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article says she was a founding member of No Doubt. She wasn't. Her brother was. She joined the band later.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:364d:70e0:90d7:dcc3:6f3f:d055 ( talk) 18:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Today, Stoya accused her former boyfriend, Deen, of raping her on her twitter. Multiple users added the accusation to their respective articles citing only to the tweet which led to reversions and semi-page protections. Another user cited to a post from Buzzfeed [16] which I did not feel was adequate for such a serious allegation. Please keep an eye out on the respective articles. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 05:33, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
As predicted, coverage continues growing -- and now it is reported in New York Magazine -- which is additionally reporting that The Frisky is ending Deen's sex advice column due to the accusation, a real-world consequence. Is that addition not sourcing enough? Pandeist ( talk) 19:26, 29 November 2015 (UTC) And now reported in Cosmopolitan as well. Pandeist ( talk) 21:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Michael Nouri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Article states that Nouri was born in 1945, yet later says he enlisted in the military in 1942. It should be rewritten to clarify what parts are describing his father, and which parts can be attributed to him.
(Comment added by Dfhawk)
The article Markus Hess is severely lacking in references, which is a problem given that it suggests that the subject is a criminal. What's the best approach to take here? Removing all of the unsourced material would leave virtually nothing. Cordless Larry ( talk) 19:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
This article needs a major review ASAP because it is on the front page of reddit. In particular the concern is over
sexual assualt section. Much of that section relies on a single source called The Inquisitr and that name alone should make one wary. The following text needs scrutinizing: it is alleged that Manning, while being examined by a female trainer, pulled down his shorts and sat on the trainer's face. He proceeded to rub his rectum and testicles on the woman's face until she was able to free herself from him
. I'd investigate this claim myself, but I don't have the time. This is a highly viewed article at the moment and it would be terrible for a BLP subject to be smeared because the article might use poor sourcing.
Which Hazel? (
talk) 22:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Rodrigo Constantino ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This page goes in-depth into the views of a political pundit who is a fringe figure at best. Within the body of the article are summarized three editorial pieces Rodrigo Constantino has written. This is not relevant or notable. This page is being used to flaunt the political views of some contributors. No other political pundit has large excerpts of his own writing on controversial topics and nothing else. I request this page be reduced to a stub and his views be summarized in one paragraph at most.
Tony Sparber ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The Tony Sparber article is an orphan - how do I link it to other articles?
How can this article be improved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerlauren ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Great! I've added a few more books as sources and changed the wording a bit. Do you have specific suggestions? Writerlauren ( talk) 18:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Courtney Stadd ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
May require some cleanup as it pertains to convictions listed. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
This article has an editor who removes all content she didn't write (ARCIALIM). Have a look at the history.
Also I believe she has been removing comments from the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.100.132.176 ( talk) 00:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I removed Robert Lewis Dear's birthdate, but it got added back. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 02:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
This reads like an advertisement with no attempt at neutrality. Also, it is not written entirely in the third person eg. "In 2003, she set up my own PR and Communications business locally." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.199.250.25 ( talk) 23:04, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Feuerstein ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I am bringing this article here for the following reasons: 1. Feuerstein has been in the news a lot lately b/c of his campaign against Starbucks, which has led to lots of criticism of him in the media 2. Some nasty edits have been made to this article, including one that was apparently so bad it had to be suppressed 3. A recent probably GF edit added content sourced to sources (Addictinginfo and Patheos) of questionable reliability especially for a BLP. I would like to know if others think there is a problem w/anything in the article now. Everymorning (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Information about the shooter's religion has been repeatedly added to this article despite no credible source stating the shooter religion's anything to do with the shooting and is thus "a conjectural interpretation" and original research. ParkH.Davis ( talk) 08:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
T. V. John Langworthy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Was wondering if some others would mind taking a look at this BLP. Nothing in the article is supported by an inline citation even though there are lots of sources listed as references (not sure how many of them satisfy WP:RS or WP:SIGCOV though). Page was blanked (which was inappropriate) by another editor, but content does seem rather promotional and is pretty much the work of a SPA who may possibly be connected to Langworthy in some way. (Same editor is also working on a draft about Langworthy's record label). -- Marchjuly ( talk) 08:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Article, Mofford, a Verdun native who played for Monklands High School and the Verdun Maple Leafs, began his CFL career with the Montreal Alouettes,[1] playing 6 seasons and 79 games (up to 1979) and won 2 Grey Cup championships, in 1974 and 1977. He later joined the Ottawa Rough Riders for one season, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for two seasons, and returned to the Als in 1981, playing 3 games. His last year was 1982, when he played 4 games for the woeful Montreal Concordes.
Please change to: Mofford, a NDG native who played for Monklands High School and the Verdun Maple Leafs, began his CFL career with the Montreal Alouettes,[1] playing 6 seasons and 79 games (up to 1979) and won 2 Grey Cup championships, in 1974 and 1977. He later joined the Ottawa Rough Riders for one season, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for two seasons, and returned to the Als in 1981, playing 3 games. His last year was 1982, when he played 4 games for the woeful Montreal Concordes.
NDG Native not Verdun - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Stuart Mofford ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
http://www.hayhouseradio.com/#!/host/diane-ray this is Diane Ray of HayHouseRadio.com . The picture for Diane Ray american singer shows Diane Ray of Hay House. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=diane%20ray this picture is of the wrong person and needs to be removed. Please take this picture down in reference to Diane Ray the american singer. This is incorrect. sincerely, Diane Ray HayHouseRadio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.78.191.190 ( talk) 19:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Lawrence Khong ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I was watching the edit filter log when I saw the Lawrence Khong article appear. I reverted this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Lawrence_Khong&diff=prev&oldid=693658418 because I thought it abandoned neutral point of view, but the other editor quickly reverted my revert back to his original statement and said it is neutral because the guy is homophobic. I want to head off an edit war and I am wondering who is more right, what is more neutral, the current revision or my reverted version of the other editor's version? Thanks. In veritas ( talk) 04:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Ion Croitoru ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) For those of you who don't read WT:PW (probably a great many), GaryColemanFan and I have been going back and forth for years. For my part, a lot of it has been criticism of blatant cherry-picking of sources and even more blatant trophy hunting, which is typically blown off in a derisive manner. The lead of this particular article ends with "On January 24, 2011, Croitoru was charged with first degree murder in connection with the 2008 execution of Jonathan Barber in Burnaby, British Columbia". Well, it's now nearly five years later. You have to go to the very bottom of the article to find anything about the events of the past five years, but does the reader really learn anything from that? In one paragraph, he was convicted of a crime in connection with Barber's death (but not first-degree murder, which also calls to mind the issue of undue weight in the lead) and is currently incarcerated, yet in the very next paragraph he "currently lives in Vancouver, British Columbia with his common-law wife and his two young sons" and is busy pursuing a career in the entertainment industry. So which is it? This isn't what I expect from either a BLP or a good article. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
That is one of the most obnoxious-looking things I have ever seen on Wikipedia. Looking at the frequency and placement of references in that short passage, it's pretty abundantly clear that the community is not assuming good faith when it comes to the intelligence of our readers, rather assuming that readers need to have their hands held every little last baby step along the way. To reiterate, is my attitude the real problem? I mean, it's trivially easy to find statements such as "The rest of you need to get off your high horse and understand that we're here for readers. Period." on various and sundry bully boards, but if we're categorically viewing readers as dumbed down and willing to accept whatever we offer them, do such statements really mean anything? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:49, 3 December 2015 (UTC)The Pugh brothers, Jamin (Jay)[5] (born January 25,[6] 1984)[5] and Mark[7] (born January 17, 1985)[7]
Two editors are trying to put a violation of WP:BLP in the article, "2015 Minneapolis Shooting", named Mangokeylime and Mr. Granger. The first editor made the addition; the second, Granger, is trying to back him up. They want to include a statement that a BLM protestor later claimed to have 'heard the N-word' during a confrontation between apparently dozens of Black Lives Matter protestors and three white visitors to the protest. The person who was reported to have heard "the N-word" didn't say who, he believed, spoke that word. Yet, the reader would be left with the impression that the person who spoke the word must have been one of those three whites, rather than those dozens of BLM protestors: If it had been one of the BLM protestors, that usage wouldn't have been especially remarkable or significant, let alone controversial. So, the only purpose of including this statement in the article would be to give a false impression of what happened. So, I feel that has crossed the line into libel, or at least "False Light". Since those three visitors are still alive, and identifiable, I think WP:BLP applies. Further, Granger stated: "there seems to be consensus for including this. Please gain consensus for removing it before you do so again" But the edit had just been made by Mangokeylime, then reverted by me (following WP:BRD). Nobody else had spoken up to defend it. Clearly, nothing had happened for Granger to conclude "there seems to be consensus". I believe an edit-war was committed by Granger, when he immediately reverted my revert of the initial edit. Following WP:BRD would require that he begin with a discussion of the issue, rather than reverting my revert. Lurie2 ( talk) 22:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Davis (writer) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Hi!
Thank you so much in advance for reading. I'm looking to have a low quality warning removed from an entry.
I work at Epic Magazine, and I'm inquiring about the biography for one of our co-founders, Joshuah Davis (writer). Joshuah more than meets the notability criteria for a biographical entry (Josh is a major American journalist who has written articles that have become major motion pictures [1], and our company has been profiled in The New York Times [2]), but there's a warning atop the page about low quality. I cleaned up the text so that it has an objective tone and added several sources.
I'd be so appreciative if you could review the entry, and if you think it's appropriate delete the warning. And if there's anything else to be done to improve the page, please let me know.
Thanks again,
Charlie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicodemus Underwood ( talk • contribs) 00:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
References
WP:BLP viewers might like to cast an eye on List of plagiarism incidents. There are signs of political COI there. My view is that only plagiarism established by authoritative ( WP:RS) sources should be allowed. Unestablished allegations should not be permitted. Some editors claim that other Wikis are valid sources for a BLP. I disagree. Other editors may like to consider. Xxanthippe ( talk) 03:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC).
Hey guys, I wanted to get some extra eyes on the article for Marathon course-cutting. Long story short, I mentioned this here back in August because there were some SPAs trying to add a specific person to the article after the guy's article was deleted at AfD. The whole story with that was that this guy allegedly cheated on a marathon and the article came across to me like a pretty thinly veiled attack page made to shame him. While the evidence did look pretty incriminating, the problem is that the guy claimed his innocence (and as far as I know, still does). That posed a huge, HUGE BLP issue for obvious reasons and trying to shift everything to a different page didn't solve the issue. We've had people threaten legal action over less on here, so I can imagine that there would be people that'd be very unhappy with being included on such a negative list. Whether they did this or not is irrelevant - if they're not notable enough for their own articles then they don't belong on the article. Arguing that someone got coverage, no matter how heavy, over a short period of time isn't good enough in this type of situation given how harmful being included in a page like this could be, especially since this could fall under WP:NCRIME.
A look at the page itself showed that it was a catch all for anyone who got a smattering of news coverage for alleged or confessed cheating, which also posed a BLP issue as well. Oldelpaso actually voiced concern over this months before I came across the article as well. Myself and Collect ended up removing pretty much all but a very few instances from the article and at one point the revert war grew so bad that NeilN had to protect the page. He may have to do this again.
I would like to have some extra eyes on the article to prevent further revert attempts. If it's going to be like last time, then it's likely going to have some people trying to revert back to the old version. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 21:02, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
William Ackerman ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Will Ackerman was born in Palo Alto, CA not in West Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.135.142.80 ( talk) 18:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. Can I have another set of eyes on this article? I made the following edit, here, using Stiki, after reading the underlying reference articles. The issue I had was threefold: First, the edit seemed to be drawing conclusions (in a negative fashion) from the underlying articles; Second, per BLP, allegations like this should be multi-sourced; and third, the edit does not make it clear that these are allegations, but asserts them to be facts. Another editor, Schwede66, has reverted twice, but has done the right thing and engaged on the talk page. Hopefully, we can hash it out there, but I wanted others who look over BLP's to take a look. I certainly want to know if folks think my interpratation is out of line. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 19:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
This could use a lot of oversight, and perhaps page protection if necessary. Especially in the last few days, this has been the subject of alternating bouts of vandalism and BLP violations, puffery and copyright violations, including edits by an eponymous account. Assistance appreciated. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 17:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
ASA Anime Production Company The Animation Studio is one of the leading distributors of anime and other foreign entertainment properties in all of North America — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.101.115 ( talk) 02:10, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
[Moved to WP:RSN to hopefully get more eyes on it] – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 23:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I am Kemi Omololu-Olunloyo of HNNAfrica.com and very angry at Wikipedia and seeking legal advice because I am being slandered and defamed on an encyclopedia trolls are allowed to edit. I noticed a Wikipedia article on me created sometimes this year. There are parts of it not accurate. I opened an account to be able to post this. I understand my profile is locked because you people have a troll and fighting problem. I read the talk page. Under Charges in Georgia and deportation from Canada my profile is linked to Newton County Sherrifs page on 2003 charges that were dropped 2010 after a Toronto Star story in 2009. I am not responsible for Newton County updating their database but my attorney has contacted them. Then there is somebody editing that page with a conflict of interest which should not be as I have a lot of trolls online. Many of these trolls are passing this info all over the net saying that I'm wanted. It is libelous and I want that link removed till Wikipedia verifies it themselves? Ododowiki ( talk) 15:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Looking for help on Karyn Calabrese. An IP user has reverted a BLP tag despite the article still suffering from poor sources. I am concerned that the IP user is practicing FanPOV, as past edits seems a bit more promotional to this article. There is also concern on this article for WP:FRINGE. Delta13C ( talk) 06:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Lucy Allan (politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
British MP has been accused of faking death threats against herself, and has (partially) denied this accusation. Nuances of the situation are being ignored by IPs who are changing the article to state the fakery as fact in Wikipedia's voice. Could use a few more eyes. Brustopher ( talk) 11:56, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
The other day I came across an article for a movie called, America: A Call to Greatness, that I'm 99% positive never actually existed (see my comment in the talk section for more details not related to BLPs). There are virtually no reliable citations in this article to date. I made an honest effort and wasn't able to find a single reliable source to verify that a film with this title was ever released in theaters or aired on TV. What's more, since 2011, it's been mentioned in the narrative and filmography of BLPs (and recently deceased persons) for many well-known celebrities with citations for the movie's amateurishly designed homepage, IMDb page and a YouTube video. Several users have attempted to delete the references, but almost all over them were reverted later and have remained since. This is only one of many dubious articles related to Warren H. Chaney that are edited by the same small number of folks. (See also BLPs on Warren H. Chaney and his wife, Deborah Winters, for more poorly sourced stuff. I'm not even up to scrutinizing their pages yet.) The reason I'm posting here is because there are references to this movie on lots of celebrity articles, so it will be time-consuming to delete them one by one, especially since this user has a habit of reverting edits. Can anyone guide me as to the best way to get remove all of the poorly sourced movie references on celeb pages? Do I just do it manually? Permstrump ( talk) 10:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
This article is a biography of a living person with no sources and is written in a promotional tone. I have requested its deletion multiple times, but the creator has removed the speedy deletion and proposed deletion templates and continues to do so even after warnings were left on his talk page. jBot-42 00:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBot-42 ( talk • contribs)
Update: Page has been deleted by User:Delldot. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 10:21, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This concerns the wikipedia page / biography of Campbell Newman /info/en/?search=Campbell_Newman
I have attempted to include relevant sourced and contextual information in this wikipedia page, which has been reverted three times without explanation. The last editor which reverted the entry I've attempted to make threatened me with an editing ban, but did not offer any explanation of why the information was not relevant.
Please review this entry, the revision history, and the talk page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Campbell_Newman&diff=694762692&oldid=694744810
The information I am attempting to include is as follows :
On October 24th, 2014, according to reports, Newman threatened to have police shoot live bullets at protesters at the upcoming G20 summit in Brisbane. At the time, Newman said "It’s like when you have guests at your house. If your kids start misbehaving then you discipline them, . . . Only this time it will be with a high-powered sniper bullet to the brain, instead of a rubber hose to the back of the legs." http://www.betootaadvocate.com/uncategorized/premier-newman-orders-g20-cops-to-shoot-on-sight/
This information is sourced and relevant to the section on Newman's term of office, as he was not re-elected in the following election (probably due to a drop in popularity for acts similar to this). http://auspol.wikia.com/wiki/How_evil_is_Campbell_Newman%3F I should note that the entire biographical entry on Newman has virtually none of the content which the previous cite has. It suggests to me that the entry is being edited or controlled by someone with a political agenda, and that such control is not objective and therefore violates Wikipedia guidelines.
I find it odd that an editor would deliberately censor this information which seems to me highly relevant when one looks at the other kinds of information in that section of the wikipedia entry on Newman.
Please respond or mediate or intervene in this dispute. I will not undo this censorship, but it seems to me that censorship of relevant information is exactly what wikipedia editors should not do.
-end — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.74.253.202 ( talk) 12:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
John Glen (politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User:Qpzmq has consistently reverted to a previous edit on John Glen's page, including a biased description of Mr Glen's beliefs, and disproportionate weight given to his position on the same-sex marriage bill.
Obviously all of Mr Glen's voting positions are a matter of public record, but it is evident that this article is not attempting to be based on a NPOV. In order to avoid a conflict of interest, or edit warring, we don't wish to continuously delete or edit the article, and would be very grateful for any help in restoring it to be a factual rather than ideological biography
WMinster-2015 ( talk) 12:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I recently copy edited this article with regards to general aspects such as referencing and content updates. Upon doing so, Nomoskedasticity reinstated a contentious sentence from the lede - the rest was left per my version. A friendly yet lively discussion ensued on the article's talk page involving a few of the article's recurring editors. I'm posting here in the hopes of garnering much needed feedback when the aforementioned discussion seems to be going nowhere, or rather somewhere unproductive. I'll try to summarise both sides of the debate, even though one of my main concerns hasn't been discussed at all and considering I am mostly unfamiliar with previous edits to the article). The sentence removed by me was "His business practices have been described by detractors as having the characteristics of a vulture fund, a characterization which Singer rejects." Secondly, 67% of the section treating his company, Elliott Management, is about 3 minor occurrences involving distressed debt ( WP:CRITICISM).
My arguments were:
Arguments for inclusion of the sentence as proposed by Nomoskedasticity, NickCT and SegataSanshiro1 - note there weren't any comments besides those 3 other editors':
Finally, note my brief counterarguments provided previously are not intended to incline readers my way, it's just a simple way of not having to post many replies a posteriori. Please feel free to add counterarguments next to my arguments above, or arguments from any side I forgot to relay (discerning content in long discussions is quite a feat). I think we all agree on the article's page that certain bits could use copy editing, we've all stated that in the talk page. It's good that I've managed to tweak it a bit and finally remove the ominous NPOV tag, even though it still needs some work. I look forward to reading others' opinions and seeing how we can move forward. Thank you all. Regards, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm glad this issue is being discussed and would ask users to focus on the issue at hand rather then deviating away so uninvolved editors can read through this post with ease. The fact that we are using a derogatory term to describe an individual who's business practices are 100% legal is absurd. Yes, there are articles (the majority of which are pretty heavily biased) use the term in reference to Elliott Management, his company, but to attack the subject with the term "vulture" is highly unencyclopedic. Comparing someone to a bird of prey that feeds on the death of a sick or injured animal or person is incredibly disparaging. Singer, or any hedge fund manager for that matter, would never deem themselves or their business practices as having the traits of a "vulture fund". This content should not be included in a BLP, especially in the lead section. I look forward to hearing other uninvolved editors' input. Meatsgains ( talk) 02:44, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Juan Domínguez ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please make correction on your search engine page for Juan Dominguez fight on 12-8-2015, who did not pass on. Thank God — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.37.24 ( talk) 13:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Jim Fiore ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article has a lot of issues: it does not have a neutral point of view, includes unsourced information, is imbalanced, and generally doesn't follow many additional guidelines of Wikipedia. The page is clearly being used for disparagement of a living person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:6B41:3800:C81F:A6F2:62E6:CEEB ( talk) 04:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Ali Olomi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please change the name Ali A. Olomi to Ali Olomi. They are 2 different people. Currently you have Ali A. Olomi listed but with the incorrect Biography. You have Ali Olomi who's an Actor's Biography here. Please change the name Ali A. Olomi to Ali Olomi
Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Movieindustry ( talk • contribs) 08:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Aishveryaa Nidhi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This article about Aishveryaa Nidhi is created by herself and her friends for self publicity. This article should reported and removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.134.81 ( talk) 11:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Alistair Carmichael ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This is now a controversial subject, can it be be semi protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AAEmmerson ( talk • contribs) 11:10, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Her middle name should be spelled "Anne" with an e. Mitzi.humphrey ( talk) 19:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Suzanne Nossel ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I'm troubled by this para, which makes some strong assertions that aren't backed up with citations and veers toward political opinion.
Nossel has been credited with coining the term "Smart Power", in the title of a 2004 Foreign Affairs article in which she proposed a policy of liberal internationalism, outlining the concept of the U.S. using military power as well as other forms of “soft power.” It was seen as a justification for US imperialism and its attempt to maintain world hegemony - this time dressed up in the language of humanitarianism. [citation?] No wonder the term was popularized by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in both her nomination hearing to become Secretary of State and in her farewell address upon leaving the State Department, and has since become a defining feature of U.S. foreign policy. [citation?]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssata ( talk • contribs) 15:45, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to be away from Wikipedia for a few days, but wanted to alert others to this source as a possible BLP violation. This source isn't about Chopra per say, but about identification of what the authors term "pseudo-profund bullshit". The authors of the source note that:
An editor suggests the content is coatrack content. He reduced the inflammatory nature of the original edit to the Chopra article, and also moved the content out of the lead.
I question whether this content and source has any place in the Chopra article since it is not providing any information about Chopra, and agree that it is coatrack content. As the authors themselves noted:
The study: [32]
The content presently in the article: [33]
"A 2015 paper examining "the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit" used Chopra's Twitter feed as the canonical example, and compared this with fake Chopra quotes generated by a spoof website.[123][124][125]"
Might be a good idea if uninvolved editors took a look.( Littleolive oil ( talk) 04:44, 12 December 2015 (UTC))
You have the dancing dolls of jackson mississippi picture for dancing dolls of japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B8EC:120:A885:B5BC:1DCA:636B ( talk) 01:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
On October 13 a bot put 109 BLP articles into category "Climate Change Deniers" due to a CFD discussion. Number of editors participating: 10. Number of notices on the BLP talk pages: zero. Number of reliable sources cited to support the changes: zero. I claim that WP:BLPN is the appropriate discussion venue for such a large set of BLP changes, and that labelling people "deniers" is not appropriate without a strong consensus of subject-specific sources plus a strong consensus of editors who have actually seen the BLPs and are aware of previous discussions on the BLPs' talk pages and are aware of WP:AE. The articles are: Khabibullo Abdussamatov Stuart Agnew Syun-Ichi Akasofu Claude Allègre J. Scott Armstrong Michele Bachmann Sallie Baliunas Timothy Ball Robert Balling Joseph Bast Joe Bastardi Godfrey Bloom Joe Barton David Bellamy Maxime Bernier Marsha Blackburn Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen Christopher Booker Barry Brill Paul Broun Douglas Carswell Robert M. Carter John Christy Petr Chylek Ian Clark (geologist) John Coleman (news weathercaster) Piers Corbyn Ann Coulter Vincent Courtillot Ken Cuccinelli Judith Curry Edward E. David Jr. James Delingpole Martin Durkin (television director) Myron Ebell Nigel Farage Chris de Freitas David Deming David Douglass Don Easterbrook David Evans (mathematician and engineer) Ivar Giaever Steven Goddard Vincent R. Gray William M. Gray William Happer John Hawkins (columnist) Rodney Hide Ole Humlum David Icke Craig D. Idso Keith E. Idso Sherwood B. Idso Jim Inhofe Wibjörn Karlén Michael Kelly (physicist) Steve King William Kininmonth (meteorologist) Václav Klaus Steven E. Koonin Lyndon LaRouche David Legates Lucia Liljegren Rush Limbaugh Richard Lindzen Scott Lively Craig Loehle Anthony Lupo Bob Lutz (businessman) Steve McIntyre Ross McKitrick Patrick Michaels Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley Andrew Montford Patrick Moore (environmentalist) Marc Morano Nils-Axel Mörner Tad Murty Joanne Nova Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) Vladimir Paar Sarah Palin Garth Paltridge Tim Patterson Melanie Phillips Ian Plimer Denis Rancourt Arthur B. Robinson Marco Rubio Burt Rutan Pat Sajak Murry Salby Nicola Scafetta Harrison Schmitt Tom Segalstad Nir Shaviv Fred Singer Willie Soon Roy Spencer (scientist) Bret Stephens Peter Stilbs Philip Stott Henrik Svensmark George H. Taylor Hendrik Tennekes Anastasios Tsonis Fritz Vahrenholt Jan Veizer Anthony Watts (blogger). I will place appropriate notices on the talk pages. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 17:23, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
The articles were already in the category Climate change skeptics, which was renamed to deniers. Frankly, I think that the inclusion of most of those people in the original category was not controversial. What is controversial is the new category name, which sounds pejorative. I don't see this is a BLP issue. I didn't participate (or even know about) the original discussion. But to the extent that the new category name is pejorative, I'd certainly vote to revert to the skeptic category name. M.boli ( talk) 18:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps some sort of climate category might be okay, but it's very difficult. If someone denies that the US can unilaterally take action to stop climate change, does that make them a "denier"? If they deny that climate change would be a totally bad thing, without any silver lining, does that make them a denier? If they acknowledge climate change but attribute 51% of it to non-human causes, are they a "denier"? Maybe a better category would be "people with a position on climate change". Anythingyouwant ( talk) 18:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
"...advocates for climate change denial",
"...who denies climate change",
"...rejects the scientific consensus on...", etc. However, that's just a personal preference. Our sources are extremely clear on these articles that the subject denies climate change. Our sources are also very clear that the term "skeptic" is incorrect, and intentionally misleading. I'm frustrated that Pete is forum shopping; this discussion has been had many times, twice now at CfD, so Pete is trying somewhere new to get a different result. Nearly everything he's said in his first post here is untrue to some degree. If anyone wants the cat renamed, we can have that conversation (that's why WP:CfD exists), but please look into the sourcing and the BLPs first. Try Anthony Watts (blogger) for an example, and investigate the talk page and sources. As our sources there indicate clearly, "skeptic" is absolutely not the right word. — Jess· Δ ♥ 19:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Those who hold a position here because of what they "know to be the truth" are precisely analogous to those who favour or oppose any "truth" in the first place. Rather, we should divorce this from what we "know" or "believe" or "believe we know" and stick strictly to the precept that people should not be categorized for their beliefs except on the basis of categories they place themselves in by stating their own self-categorization.
Else we are as bad as any who have labeled folks on the basis of beliefs as "heretics" or "witches" or any other category susceptible of "guilt by association" tactics. I, for one, have always opposed "guilt by association" arguments on Wikipedia and in real life, and if I be the only one left in the world holding that personal belief, if I be the only one in the world in my self-identification in the category of "do not classify people because they differ from you in religion or any other belief at all" then I proudly assert my position in that category. Collect ( talk) 21:00, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Sadly, Wikipedia is turning its back on scientific source in favour of becoming a poor imitation of Conservapedia. Far-right politicians and their conspiracy theories are being given undue weight, fringe theories being promoted. AusLondonder ( talk) 22:51, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
I intend to go to WP:ANRFC and ask "Closure by admin requested for WP:BLPN discussion 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once", on Thursday November 12, unless other editors say more time is needed. Peter Gulutzan ( talk) 18:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Just an update but the category at CSD has been deleted. As such, this can possibly be closed as moot. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 02:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
An editor is making edits that call Amy Schumer a racist, by removing RS-cited statements that balance an op-ed writer's WP:FRINGE claim that she is a racist.
Calling a living person a racist by removing cited evidence to the contrary seems a WP:BLP vio — yet this editor claims it's a BLP vio not to say she's a racist. I really don't understand, unless it's someone who hates Schumer's politics. She's anti-gun, and that riles certain people. Please see Talk:Amy Schumer/Archive 1#BLP. -- Tenebrae ( talk) 23:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Can you erase the article of Jussi Näppilä (finnish footballer) born 1987.
Article is poorly sourced and includes false information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:999:20:710F:221:E9FF:FEDE:C147 ( talk) 00:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Jonathan Karl ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The very short read required to find the grossly hateful comments made on your Johnathan Karl page would prove quite easy. Nothing more needs said. This is a hit piece pain and simple. Pages like this gives Wikipedia a very bad name.
Martin Carlson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.45.223.53 ( talk) 04:19, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Steve Comisar ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Experienced editors, please keep an eye on this biography. Comisar is an imprisoned con man who is trying to reshape his biography in a promotional fashion. I have been personally threatened for trying to prevent that from happening. Thanks for your help. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:23, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Accusations by his ex-wife that he molested his daughter were recently added in a section called Private life. I was hoping to talk about it with whoever answers my Request Edit, but I realize the queue is about 6-8 months backlogged.
According to The Los Angeles Times no charges were ever filed. The DA's report noted a lack of evidence and that the accusations were made by his ex-wife one day after he filed for divorce and began a custody battle.
I thought WP:BLPCRIME prevented us from covering crimes where no charges were filed? Please politely correct me if I am wrong. I appreciate your time and attention in advance. Please note my COI disclosure. David King, Ethical Wiki ( Talk) 18:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)