Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:13, 8 April 2011

• WP:BLPN
• WP:BLP/N
• WP:BLPNB
• WP:BLP/NB

This noticeboard is for discussing the application of the biographies of living people (BLP) policy to article content. Please seek to resolve issues on the article talk page first, and only post here if that discussion requires additional input.

Do not copy and paste defamatory material here; instead, link to a diff showing the problem.

Additional notes:

• Edits by the subject of an article may be welcome in some cases.
• For general content disputes regarding biographical articles, try Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies instead.
• Editors are encouraged to assist editors regarding the reports below. Administrators may impose contentious topic restrictions to enforce policies.

• Refining the administrator elections process
• AI-generated images depicting living people
• Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace
• Voluntary RfAs after resignation
• Proposed rewrite of WP:BITE
• LLM/chatbot comments in discussions

Aaron Saxton

Would any editors be available to have a look at the Aaron Saxton BLP? This includes an embedded video, originally self-published as part of a series on YouTube which has been uploaded to Commons (see Commons category). The YouTube video itself is, as far as I am aware, non-notable, in that no reliable sources have commented upon it. It, and the other videos in the series, make statements about third parties, and I am unsure if the embedding of the video in the article is in line with WP:BLPSPS. Views? --JN466 10:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I did notice how the videoes were uploaded to youtube and uploaded from there to here and now removed from youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgSWH64wmJE - I wonder if the permission we have is actually verified as the subject in question? I was wondering, if it was him , he will be aware they are all now hosted here and why the uploader to youtube removed them? The uploaders channel has basically been blanked - http://www.youtube.com/user/aaronsaxton1#g/c/B1EB614764CFDF0B - Perhaps someone with OTRS at commons could have a look at https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketID=4052753 and see who dealt with the original OTRS and what kind of verification of permission is there. As for the notability of the video itself as its self published and discusses other people that would create serious issues or a violation in my mind in regard to SELFPUB.Off2riorob (talk) 11:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, permissions seems ok, although no extra effort has been expended to ensure the granter was Saxton, but this is normally done only if someone challenges the copyright, or there is some other reason to expend extraordinary effort. So you'd be back to SEFPUB and other arguments for/against inclusion. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Who dealt with the original OTRS details. Off2riorob (talk) 14:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You don't need to know that. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) - Seems a bit unnecessarily secretive - So the OTRS permission - was it an email from the copyright holder or was it just that the youtube account was in the name of the person in the video? Is there actually any verification at all? As regards not allowing a question as to who dealt with the original OTRS details, could you direct me to that policy/guideline, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

At the risk of violating BEANS, I'll simply say I'm concerned about the Wikimedia privacy policy, and leave it at that. The person self-identified and used an email address which would indicate they were who they stated. More was not done, as I have mentioned before. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 14:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, well, thanks for looking. Off2riorob (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

- So, its so hard to assess when you are not an OTRS or an administrator, - this video was uploaded to wikipedia commons by User:Cirt on the 19th November 2009 from a youtube account in the name of Aaron Saxton and the next day after a verification email from Aaron Saxton the subject of the video had been received at OTRS, User:Cirt then added the ORTS verified permission template? Off2riorob (talk) 16:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, an OTRS volunteer "verifying" his own uploads... The secret documentation is an effective threshold against copyright challenges. As to the BLP issue, yes, the article is stronly dependent on this self-published source. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps its a side issue but the Aaron Saxton BLP was also written by ... User:Cirt - Off2riorob (talk) 17:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

This is one of several videos of critics of the Church of Scientology uploaded to Commons by Cirt and collected at the Free-use Scientology-related video project. Although Cirt verified their own upload, Cirt is an OTRS volunteer and the ticket can be reviewed by any editor with OTRS access (as KillerChihuahua has done). The issue here is the use of the video on en.wiki, if claims are made about third parties. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I had a look at it, the written transcript of the video is here at commons - uploaded to the chat forum of the anti Scientology activist group Anonymous (group) on november 19, 2009 - uploaded to wikipedia by user:Cirt the next day. Off2riorob (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC) - as I see it, he is mostly talking about himself and his experiences in Scientology but doesn't mention any individual specifically , but, as per BLP an org or company such as Scientology is a group of living people - as per WP:SELFPUB it is touch and go I would say take it out, if in doubt take it out. The GA reviewer had issues about it himself see Talk:Aaron Saxton/GA1 but appears to have let it ride. It could be asserted that he is an vocal oppositional of the Organization and his negative comments about the Org are self published negative opinion and should be removed from the article. Off2riorob (talk) 14:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

He is making statements that the Church disputes. The embedded video is part 1 of 7; there is more in the other 6 parts, including allegations against named persons: . The article shouldn't be a platform for his allegations. We should remove the embedded video, but leave the Commons link to them. As far as the use of the videos as sources for article content is concerned, it's mostly basic biographical detail, which is alright. The article also says "While a member of the Commodore's Messenger Organization (CMO), Saxton attempted to make sure those under his supervision had adequate nourishment. As a recruiter for the CMO, Saxton typically tried to get Scientologists between ages 13 to 14 to join the organisation.", sourced to these self-published videos. The first sentence could be perceived as self-serving. Other than that I don't see a problem with how the videos have been used to source content. --JN466 11:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

This appears to be a situation similar to that discussed in Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 62#Self-published Youtube video. In that case a similar anti-CoS video, also uploaded by Cirt but with the OTRS confirmation added shortly after by User:Kmccoy (who did not appear to be an OTRS volunteer at that time) was removed. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't get that - why would User:Kmccoy be verifying OTRS claims when he wasn't an OTRS volunteer? Off2riorob (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure there is a simple explanation. I've left a note on Kmccoy's talk page. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Kmccoy does not appear to be very active, so I have asked on the OTRS talk page. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:15, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

note - removed in this edit as per the policy issues raised and as per consensus in this discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 17:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Kim Thomson

Kim Thomson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

There is no reliable source quoted for birthdate 1960 or 1959. That is because they are both incorrect. One was created first by an unreliable fan site. The Daily Record used wikipedia as its source (please do conform). I could give you hundreds of newspaper articles with conflicting dates. This is wholly inaccurate information that you are propagating. If necessary legal action will be taken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KTLT1 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the Daily Record used Misplaced Pages as a source. You may wish to read WP:NLT if you continue to edit here. MarnetteD | Talk 15:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict):I removed the birth date as it is disputed. We are always happy to do so when facts can't be reliably sourced, or the information is taken from Misplaced Pages and is therefore circular. However, legal threats are not taken kindly here, see WP:THREAT, and in fact editors who make them are usually blocked until the threat is resolved. Jonathanwallace (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, the source is weak and disputed..so I see Johnathon has removed it, which under the circumstances, for the time being I support. She is of minor note anyways her specific age is of little value. We do need to watch out for this - recently (and I encourage others here to do the same) i have been noticing and tagging as uncited and removing - a lot of uncited claims of a specific date of birth - these have been sitting in our articles for far too long, - challenge then and remove if there is not a strong WP:RS that actually supports it. We are WP:MIRRORed all over the web and it is happening more often that we might imagine that some low grade source is referenced wikipedia without admitting that they got it here, and when you look here it was uncited in a BLP for years.. This is the reason that we should be pro - active in either citing to the strongest reliable externals or removal of weakly supported claims from BLP articles primarily but also wikipedia in general, this imo is especially true is regards to personal details about a living person, such as a specific date of birth and children and marriage etc. Off2riorob (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your posts JW and Off2. I was making a long post on Ms Thompson's talk page and did not see these until now. I will certainly defer to your assessments of the situation though I am still leery of the long term socking that went on. On another note - having seen her performances over many years I wouldn't call her of "minor note" but that is POV on my part (Off2 this is me trying to be humorous - if it causes offense then I most certainly apologize.) My thanks to you both for taking the time to post here. MarnetteD | Talk 16:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I agree, looking at her viewing figures and career and celebrity activities, medium note is much more correct. A picture would help, as at least that give readers a focus point as to her general age. Perhaps readers here can google-foo and strong claim for her DOB.Off2riorob (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

My (apparently minority) view is we should not have removed the birth year. We had a source for it, and I still can't follow why that source is unreliable or the basis for KTLT1 saying the source copied Misplaced Pages. Seems to me we're kowtowing to the user's threat, which is pretty damned silly anyway. What's her legal claim? Libel? She'd be laughed out of court. At the same time, I do agree that whether or not we list her birth year(s) is not particularly important, although the same could be said about many other articles, and Wikipedians, for reasons I often disagree with, generally love to include DOBs, ethnicity, religion, nationality, etc.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

BBB23--of all the edits I have made this month, that's probably the one about which I feel least strongly. However, here is my mild argument in favor. The editor who included her age looked at a source which said she was 49, and decided (as an act of synthesis) that she was therefore born in "1959 or 1960". So I still think it came out appropriately under our sourcing rules, and not because of the threat. Jonathanwallace (talk) 02:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

(I think the editor was me but haven't gone back to check.) If a source newspaper article says that Thomson is 49 at the time of the interview and the newspaper article is dated, how is that synthesis rather than math? I mean, I just used an article to source a precise birth date based on an article that didn't say the subject was born on that date but was born 8 days earlier (or later) than another date. I don't see the difference. I (or whoever) also put a note in explaining the process. (Technically, synthesis is combining two or more sources, whereas, here, I'm combining a source with my brain, but that can hardly be called original research.)--Bbb23 (talk) 15:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:OR states: "This policy allows routine mathematical calculations, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age, provided editors agree that the arithmetic and its application correctly reflect the sources." I think the best solution is "circa 1960". It would satisfy the general reader and they will understand it may be plus or minus a year. Encyclopedia Brittanica uses "circa" in many articles, especially where the only source is the age at death. Looking at her tired face in Google Images I would guess she was ten years older, so the reader is aided by the best possible reliable estimate to know she was not born circa 1940 or circa 1950. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Except we do not have any figrues to work from. Her birthyear (assuming the source is accuarte) could be any of three years (1959,60,61). Thus this is at best a guess.Slatersteven (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be a choice of three years: we have a dated source (The Daily Record, 18 October 2009) which states (para. 11) "Kim, 49, who is single". We can therefore feed those figures into {{Birth based on age as of date}}, to give born 1959 or 1960 (age 64–65). Hardly WP:OR and definitely not WP:SYN but since it is from a single source, it is WP:V. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree, both cited sources daily express, dailyrecord) yield a year of birth that is 1959 or 1960. Unsourced dates or unsourced claims by editors that might have been floating around earlier are irrelevant.--Kmhkmh (talk) 21:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Circa 1960

• Approve --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• Approve--Kmhkmh (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Born 1959 or 1960

• Approve--Kmhkmh (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

No date

• More reliable resources are available, they just haven't been tracked down yet. Gamaliel (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Comment: Writing content on WP doesn't require authors to track down the most reliable source available, but it requires authors to track down sources that are reliable enough--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:36, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, a this is a better direction to progress. Off2riorob (talk) 19:32, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Ronn Torossian (new)

Ronn Torossian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• very recent discussion at this noticeboard, still currently active - see here

Ronn Torossian page has bias and multiple untruths which an individual user Ravpapa has gone wild on accusing many of sockpuppets (as if that would permit him to post the wild untruths). Torossian has won awards from Ernst & Young and Inc Magazine and owns 1 of the largest PR agencies in the US for which the NY Times, Business Week and others profiled him. His page went through many edits for many years and had multiple discussions. This user has now completely biased the page.

Of note is that user fancies himself an expert at inserting bias and has succeeded. www.en.wikipedia.org/user:Ravpapa/Tilt

Years ago he was a spokesperson for Israel government and perhaps thats worthy of 1 line mention. In addition, review the post: His claim: "which urged Arabs to move out of Jerusalem." Isnt supported by the source he claims - should be removed. 2 Rabbis who criticize: 1 criticizes a company not Torossian, and the other was in 1 politically slanted left wing newspaper which is a questionable source on a living person. (and he removed multiple positive quotes). Source is a blog and nowhere does it say he is a spokesperson: "He is spokesman for the Hebron Fund, a US foundation that supports Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron. --Greenbay1313 (talk) 17:39, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Why another thread? There's already an active one above. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Its been dominated by 1 user who has continued with negative sources solely. May we ask that you review the material. --Greenbay1313 (talk) 18:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

There's another thread because the article is locked, and the daily barrage of socks and SPAs are looking everywhere for some kind of loophole. I've told this latest editor on his page to please take his concerns to the relevant talk page, and to stop forum shopping. Dayewalker (talk) 18:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Greenbay1313 has now filed a COI complaint, complete with borderline personal attacks on another editor. I think we are officially through the looking glass on this one. The Interior (Talk) 18:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Unsure of what socks and SPAs are but may I ask if you reviewed said sources in the article. Ask users to visit the article and review the material which is blog sources and dangerous material. Greenbay1313 (talk) 18:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC) No personal attacks am saying simply user Ravpapa has biases he admits. Article has blogs and inaccurate sources of BLP. Opening up Misplaced Pages to a libel lawsuit. greenbay1313 (talk) 18:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC) Ronn Torossian page may have had sockpuppets but stay focused on the libelous material which is now there. Blogs, inaccurate statements and slander. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenbay1313 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like to reiterate the response on my talk page here. Greenbay1313: By posting two complaints here at BLP/N, as well as complaints at editor assistance, RfC, arbitration requests, COI/N, AN, requests for feedback, AIV, and the talk pages of random and uninvolved administrators, you are actually making things more difficult. Please stop forum and admin shopping, or your edits will go from being simply uninformed mistakes to disruptive edits, and could even warrant a block against your account. Furthermore, please watch your wording. What you said above could be perceived as a legal threat, and making legal threats is also something for which you will be blocked. – GorillaWarfare 19:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

In all fairness, I think that Greenbay is suggesting that Ronn Torossian, not Greenbay, might sue us for libel - a reasonable concern if the article is, in fact, libellous. For the time being, in spite of all the circumstantial evidence to the contrary, we should assume that Greenbay is not Ronn Torossian, and, therefore, I don't think we should consider his post a legal threat.

Sometimes it is hard to understand exactly what Greenbay, NYCdan, Abigail7, et al, is/are trying to say, because his/her/their English is so bad. I think that is the source of the confusion.

But I leave this determination to administrators with more experience in this area than I.--Ravpapa (talk) 04:33, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Hebron reference 12 is a blog. Binyamin Elon is not referenced on his site (and why is 5wpr.com used as a source and if so couldnt corporate clients be included ?) Those who wish to use Israel why have only negative sources been used and not sources which say he was a government spokesperson or praise of Rabbis ?

In terms of opinions others are included how about these ? 2011 - NY Times - For Grey Line - 1 of largest transportation companies in world - Is this not bigger than Israel 13 years ago views ? http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/tour-bus-post-to-sked-for-7am/ Publicly traded Soupman company ? http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-21/soup-kitchen-creditors-file-to-force-bankruptcy-update2-.html Musician Lil Kim: http://www.nysun.com/new-york/bar-worker-arrested-for-murder-at-lil-kim-party/83480/ Spokesperson for Israeli gov't: http://www.newprophecy.net/madonnawatch2.htm Restaurant chain Phillipe Chow: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/confidential/sienna-gisele-caught-on-camera/story-e6frf96x-1111115728651 All of these: http://www.holmesreport.com/agencyreport-info/1930/5W-Public-Relations.aspx

Balance is required. --greenbay1313 (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Greenbay: Until reading your post, I thought that you and your chums were one person. You all write with the same typos and bad grammar, you all make the same arguments about the same articles. Yet I now begin to doubt this. Not only might you not be the same person, I am not sure you even talk to each other.

I say this because of this discussion at the 5WPR talk page. In that discussion, we suggested to theNYCdan that he rebuild the client list based on reliable secondary sources, which he partially did. And here you are, listing a bunch of reliable secondary sources saying who are 5WPR clients, yet you haven't added these to the client list at 5WPR.

Greenbay, get on the stick! Add these guys to the client list at 5WPR. Do some good for your boy, for a change! --Ravpapa (talk) 06:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I ask simply that users review the page for a few issues: 1: Where are any statements Torossian is active supporter of Israel as lead states. They appear to be clients - a few of many. 2: which according to Nathaniel Popper writing in The Forward, worked to push Arab citizens of Israel out of Jerusalem. Thats inaccurate as Ravpapa himself knows. Push Arab citizens of Israel out of Jerusalem ? Most Arabs of Jerusalem are not citizens and noone can say Our Jerusalem (of which a cofounder was the head of Kadima coalition, Yoel Hasson) works to do that. An honest broker would use The JERUSALEM POST source, for what Our Jerusalem was: http://www.jpost.com/Features/InTheSpotlight/Article.aspx?id=150936 During what would turn out to be a two-year stint in this country, Torossian was one of three founders - together with fellow Betar alumni and peers, today Likud MK Danny Danon and Kadima MK Yoel Hasson - of Yerushalayim Shelanu (Jerusalem Is Ours), a secular organization promoting the right of Jews to live anywhere they choose in the city of Jerusalem. ... and amazing that a 4 page Jerusalem Post feature has no positive quotes in Misplaced Pages bio. 3: Rabbi Morris Allen, who heads an organization that exposed fraud in one of 5WPR's clients, called the firm's tactics in defending the client "outrageous, to say the least." Allen is speaking about the firm should be removed from Torossian page. 4: Who says Torossian works closely with Christian supporters of Israel and are more than clients. Should be removed. There are many more issues but these are libelous, leaving apart unbalance. Instead of getting worked up about sockpuppets why not work to clean up possible legal issues dont be emotional simply review the content. Its wrong. greenbay1313 (talk) 12:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

One might think that if Ronn Torossian represented both, both Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu, he cannot be as extreme as the bio esits show - If that were the case, neither could really work with him politically. Additionally, if these people are clients - not pro bono causes that were taken - they were jobs, not advocacy. A PR Company often takes on clients with varied opinions and the representatives cannot always be presumed to agree or disagree - it's just a job.

Then there is the fact that Torossian represented Sean Combs & Pamela Anderson and neither of that is deemed qualified for inclusion - Yet, with that fact, should the article say that Torossian is an entertainer, a hip hop star or Baywatch supporter?

--TLVEWR (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Posted a proposed Torossian re-write article here for compromise. Welcome edits. http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Greenbay1313/Sandbox greenbay1313 (talk) 20:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Theres now about 75% of the article about his Israel views - But he's a PR guy why relevant ?? 1: Why is Our Jerusalem mentioned 2x ? Incorrect mention @lead should be removed immediately. 2: 1 article says not many blue chip clients, but every other article says otherwise and so too does his website. Should be removed. 3: Current Wiki entree says "especially Israeli" ??? Whats the source for that. Absolutely incorrect. 4: Last 2 lines which on this page has been agreed should be removed still exists. Why ? 5: Why so much on Israel and nothing at all on what makes him prominent ? Folks this is absurd and undue balance. greenbay1313 (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenbay1313 (talk • contribs)

update SPI - just as a note for reference, the creator of this report/thread has been blocked as a sockpuppet the report is Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Babasalichai - Off2riorob (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

John Lurie stalker

The actor, musician and artist John Lurie was the subject of a BLPN report here February 2011 because of a new editor who was posting nasty, mean-spirited little Lurie quotes in the article. Lurie certainly was cited as saying those things but they were trivial offhand comments unimportant to the man's biography—unencyclopedic and petty. They were gathered together by the editor to make Lurie look bad.

I am dead certain the BLP-violating editor is John Perry, a former friend of Lurie who was reported in The New Yorker in August 2010 as having had a "rupture" with Lurie in 2008, and then stalking Lurie. The BLP-violating editor repeatedly posted a link to John Perry's website, www.johnperrynyc.com.

The stalker-editor, Special:Contributions/Lurielurie, has been active on the page since February 3, calling John Lurie a hysteric, and saying Lurie was making up the story of having a stalker, and that Lurie repeatedly says Perry intends to kill Lurie, with "no evidence to support his claims".

After I jumped in to ride herd on the article and make sure it was neutral and well-sourced, Lurielurie began attacking me on my talk page, saying "You are in big trouble." (And again here.) Lurielurie followed that with several copy/past annoyances posted to my talk page:

Lurielurie continues to edit war at John Lurie, change wording, altering the tone so that it makes Lurie look worse and the stalker look better. What is to be done here? Is there anything actionable? Does any of this madness merit an indef block for Lurielurie?

At the very least, I would appreciate more eyes on the case. Binksternet (talk) 21:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree, more eyes would be appreciated. If erasing exchanges, then wholesale, his talk section wherein he acknowledges being self-serving is not reflective of his non-neutrality, so be it. Though based on properly sourced material, my early edits were clearly not in the spirit of Misplaced Pages. That they were removed is fair. If I am blocked by a truly neutral third party, fine. My recent edits, however, conform to NPOV, and are accurate based on sourced material.

Binksternet, by his elimination of source references which show that Lurie's claims are unsupported, and editing at the behest of the subject should likewise restrict his edits.Lurielurie (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I hope that some third party will not allow Lurie to disseminate his defamatory claims on Misplaced Pages, as Binksternet has now elected to capitulate.Lurielurie (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Added to my watchlist. OhNoitsJamie 23:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

One thing I note here, the article made reference to and characterized user comments on the Dangerous Minds blog. User comments are not reliable sources, and certainly shouldn't be discussed as primary sources. In fact, we shouldn't be linking to the article with comments displayed, but rather to the article without the comments displayed. If a reliable source discusses and analyzes the comments, we can report what that says, but we can't report directly on the comments. Yworo (talk) 14:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. When I put up the summary of the blog comments, I did so because they were the subject of previous edit warring, and because the blog was not notable by itself, but was made so because it attracted comments from the main actors: John Lurie and John Perry. At any rate, I can see the reasoning for your removal of that summary. Binksternet (talk) 14:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

We would suggest that you remove the link to Dangerous Minds completely. As you have stated the site is not notable, thus including this without the comments by Lurie and Perry is pointless. It is not a reliable source as it is Marc Campbell's uninformed opinion based on a phone conversation with John Perry. Thank you for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yabangulu (talk • contribs) 02:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

A complaint about edit-warring has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Lurielurie reported by User:The Interior (Result: ). Anyone familiar with the issues on this article is welcome to comment there. EdJohnston (talk) 15:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Anti-union violence

Anti-union violence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

appears to directly accuse a living person of asking a Governor to kill pro-union protestors. Then another person is accused based on . The issue is primarily one of coatrack against Governor Walker, who has not been alleged to have paid any attention at all to the suggestions - but the linking of him to the proposed violence is possibly a BLP concern. Is there a valid concern over the way Walker is named in the edit? Is there a concern over the way the other living people are handled in the edit? The editor making this new article states fairly clearly that it was created as WP:POINT because his AfD on Union violence failed. Collect (talk) 08:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

This argument about WP:POINT is entirely mistaken, in my view. See Talk:Anti-union violence.

The sources for the living persons-related content are the American Bar Association, and CBS News. The information is factual, and reflects exactly what the sources state. The content is not in any way directed at Governor Walker, but rather, is about two other individuals, each of whom made an effort to contact Governor Walker to convey controversial information. Both lost their jobs as a result of these attempts, which is a notable fact. Richard Myers (talk) 11:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

(ec) shows the same information added by the same editor to Union violence which would have the same BLP implication for Governor Walker. COATRACK is still COATRACK, and WP:POINT is still WP:POINT. This standard proposed by that editor would allow us to list every single email sent to a person suggesting violation of a law, and mentioning that person's name every time. I doubt that such is proper under WP:BLP. Collect (talk) 11:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Disagree. The news items are notable, they relate to unions, and are in articles about unions. Richard Myers (talk) 12:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

As an uninvolved editor, I think the material is reliably sourced and relevant to the article. There are no WP:BLP concerns in the case of such widely and reliably reported information about the two people. Nor is there any implication that Governor Walker solicited or planned to act on these suggestions--and someone has now added his statement he would never consider violence. Therefore, I don't see any BLP concerns about him either, or a WP:COATRACK. The WP:POINT argument is not really for this noticeboard, and anyway the Talk page material you cite can be construed as a plea for the inclusion of opposing or balancing information, rather than the making of a tendentious point. (For the all time classic example of a WP:POINT, see Judaism and bus stops). The whole section might be slimmed down a little for weight and possibly added to the "Recent examples" list. Jonathanwallace (talk) 13:09, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Kevin Jennings

Kevin Jennings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I wasn't sure where better to ask - a lot of these links don't seem to be from sources we can use. Is it OK to put them as external links? Jnast1 (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Good question and thanks for asking. The general answer is no. Better to park those yet unused sources on the talk page for future use. The External Links (see WP:EL) should be kept to a minimum and should feature links that are give broad insight into the life of the subject. For example the links to bio's and his official web site are appropriate but the others should be removed. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 14:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, thank you! Jnast1 (talk) 14:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Paul D. Hanson - in Alan Dershowitz article

Alan Dershowitz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This appears to be a BLP violation to me. The Alan Dershowitz article contains a paragraph about a controversy involving Dershowitz and Paul D. Hanson. The text only quotes Dershowitz' accusations and paraphrases his justifications. Here is the text in full from Alan_Dershowitz#Harvard-MIT_divestment_petition:

• Randall Adams of The Harvard Crimson writes that, in the spring of 2002, a petition within Harvard calling for Harvard and MIT to divest from Israel and American companies that sell arms to Israel gathered over 600 signatures, including 74 from the Harvard faculty and 56 from the MIT faculty. Among the signatures was that of Harvard's Winthrop House Master Paul D. Hanson, in response to which Dershowitz staged a debate for 200 students in the Winthrop Junior Common Room. He called the petition's signatories antisemitic, bigots, and said they knew nothing about the Middle East. "Your House master is a bigot," he told the students, "and you ought to know that." Adams writes that Dershowitz cited examples of human rights violations in countries that the United States supports, such as the execution of homosexuals in Egypt and the repression of women in Saudi Arabia, and said he would sue any professor who voted against the tenure of another academic because of the candidate's position toward Israel, calling them "ignoramuses with Ph.D.s."

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, thats an impressively subtle hackjob. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 15:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Looking over the source I would suggest immediate removal, this seems to be non notable campus drama rather than anything substantial. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 15:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

If anything, this makes Dershowitz look bad. My initial take is that the "campus drama" comment above is right on the money. Gamaliel (talk) 16:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

eh its all subjective on whose side of the I/P conflict you abscibe to and whether people think such a petition was a good idea The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 21:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Reza Moridi

Reza Moridi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Would you please keep an eye on the biography of Reza Moridi Canadian politician? It seems that the individuals who might not have good faith or/and respect the neutrality of this Misplaced Pages biography are trying to misrepresent the facts in this biography of living person. Looking at the history of this Misplaced Pages page one could see that in the past there were biased changes done by some users. In the past users Jonathanwallace (talk) and Collect (talk) spent time cleaned up and editing this this Misplaced Pages biography, to make certain that the neutrality of Moridi’s biography is preserved. The nationality of Moridi is Canadian and his ethnicity according to the facts, documents and evidences is Azerbaijani. User Marmoulak (talk) have changed the ethnicity of Moridi from Azerbaijani-Canadian to Iranian-Canadian without providing any proper evidences and/or inline citation. The current inline citation and evidences clearly indicate that Moridi’s nationality is Canadian and his ethnicity is Azerbaijani. Starback (talk) 20:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The following important piece of information was added to Moridi's Misplaced Pages biography. Bill 63, Nowruz Day Act, 2006 received Royal Assent in 2006, and March 21 in each year was proclaimed as Nowruz Day in Ontario. Starback (talk) 01:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Almine Barton

I have a concern with the edits and removal of pertinent parts of this article that I did extensive research on. Due to the simultaneously editing mishap/misunderstanding in 'not good faith' and claims of 'edit dispute'(see User talk:theonelife 'Warning'), I was told I am not allowed to make changes as it is deemed as edit warring under threat of blocking. I will try to make this as brief as possible, please bear with me.

• Appreciation is extended to the earnest efforts of 'clean up' of the article, however I must state some recent erroneous edits that demean, and discredit the purpose of the BLP in question to the following guidlines per wikipedia standards WP:BLP.

PLEASE REVIEW: Erroneous Deletions and Edits by the following three editors:

I request this article be put in 'incubation' or 'semi edit protect' status so I may 'clean up' the erroneous edits that discredit 'notability' and 'verifiability' on the key elements I stated above or 'adopted' by a guide who in 'good faith' will guide me on this and work with me on content and citations,etc without threats of blocking.

Thank you for your time, User:theonelifeTheonelife (talk) 21:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Okie doakie moving it into my userspace shortly for incubation and will adopt and guide user The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 21:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Now at User:ResidentAnthropologist/Almine Barton The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 21:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Richard P. (Dick) Haugland

Richard P. (Dick) Haugland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This page is a blatant resume. Please note all the references are websites, without a single neutral, objective citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jupiterdasa (talk • contribs) 22:28, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and it doesn't really indicate what Haugland is notable for. If his philanthropy can be reliably sourced, maybe that is relevant, but otherwise I don't see why there should be an article at all. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

It and Starfish Country Home School Foundation look like the work of a paid editor.   Will Beback  talk  23:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Frank Bleichman

Frank Bleichman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

An IP editor has just introduced some material from a Polish newspaper into a new section he has called "Controversy". Someone has translated a the quote into English (presumably the IP editor). I've formatted it all for him but this article is a BLP and the allegation is potentially quite serious. Are there any Polish speakers who could check out the cite please? - Sitush (talk) 00:29, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

removed pending verification its a very serious charge The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 00:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd already reverted twice & so needed to adopt a different tack. - Sitush (talk) 00:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Watchlisted as well, I'm gonna keep an eye on it in the mean time if true is it WP:RS to make such an allegation The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 01:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, it appears to be a mainstream Polish newspaper, albeit one with a right-wing(ish) past. However, my gibberish is better than my Polish, so I'll leave it to the experts. - Sitush (talk) 01:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So if true translation... The question is this the same "Franciszek Blajchman" as the one in the article? Was there a retraction or other editorial statement in the following days? This accusation seems to fly in the face too many other accounts of the official story.... The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 01:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

It is not an impossible scenario by any means: these things do come out of the woodwork & obviously it would be in the interests of (potentially) both the US & the individual to have avoided the issue. However, I'm concerned that I struggled to find English language versions of the story as these sort of news items do not tend to stay confined to one country. Also, the IPN organisation which seems to be behind the allegation appears from its own WP article to have a somewhat controversial image at times - I realise that this is circular, but I'm just working with what I've got. Sometimes I wish that I didn't patrol the category for pages with missing refs ... Let's get the translation out of the way & then maybe it needs to go to WP:RSN ? - Sitush (talk) 01:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I funneled "the source" through google translate and as added to the article it could be accurate translation. I use google translate on occasion but nuances of language are often lost. The Google Translation says "In fact, Francis Blajchman - such that his name was included in the materials of" Which depending on how accurate that is could be "such a name" meaning possible coincidence or indeed "it was him." I we need some one who can tell us exact translation. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 01:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

There may also be an issue regarding a possible copyvio - I've put a note on the talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:39, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

There is an OTRS ticket quoted there. - Sitush (talk) 01:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry - didn't see that. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:48, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I have spammed one person who speaks polish and one person who probably speaks polish to get assistance. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 01:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• I also speak polish (I saw the spam you had sent to the other person). Rzeczpospolita and Gazeta Wyborcza are the two main national daily polish-language newspapers in Poland. So it's like comparing the NYT to the WSJ. Give me a few minutes to type up a reply here. IPN is the government sponsored entity researching into the records of the past (WW II and the People's Republic), so there are bound to be controversial items that come up. Ajh1492 (talk) 01:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Did Frank Bleichman just publish a book last September (2010)? Can anyone verify this? Ajh1492 (talk) 02:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Already checked that on Amazon and Google Bs - came up with nothing. - Sitush (talk) 02:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The title of the book in Polish is - Wolę zginąć walcząc. Wspomnienia z II wojny światowej, and it translates into I prefer to die fighting. Memories of World War II. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• Here's the key passage from the article:

Kim jest autor książki? Według wydawcy Blaichman jako 16-latek był świadkiem napaści Niemiec na Polskę, stworzył żydowski oddział partyzancki na Lubelszczyźnie, który walczył z Niemcami, a po wojnie pracował w UB w Pińczowie i Kielcach. Ale to tylko pół prawdy.

W rzeczywistości Franciszek Blajchman – takie jego nazwisko figuruje w materiałach Instytutu Pamięci Narodowej – w 1945 r. był p.o. kierownika Wydziału Więzień i Obozów WUBP w Kielcach. Jego wizerunek znalazł się też na wystawie "Twarze kieleckiej bezpieki" zorganizowanej przez IPN.

• Which translates into (now, I am NOT a "certified" translator, so it's not going to hold up in a court of law):

Who is the author of a book? According to the publisher, Blaichman, at the age of 16, witnessed the German invasion of Poland. He created a Jewish partisan unit in the Lublin area, which fought with the Germans, and after the war he worked at UB in Pińczów and Kielce. But this is only half true.

In fact, "Francis Blajchman", or at least how his name was noted in the materials of the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN), in 1945 was the head of the Department of Prisons and Camps (WUBP) in Kielce. His image was also at the exhibition "Faces of the security the Kielce", organized by the IPN.

So the quote is a reasonable translation of what was stated in the article. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

... and spelling his name with an "a" instead of an "e" give this book - Sitush (talk) 02:15, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

... and quite a few news items in English. The article seems to have the wrong sp of his surname (even in the title) - Sitush (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The article specifically cites the slight difference in spelling between the IPN exhibition and elsewhere. It's the location tie-in along with the book which the newspaper article author is referencing. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand. The book spells his name with an "a", and so do various Jewish news websites. That is, Blaichman not Bleichman - Sitush (talk) 02:22, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The question was is the quote in the article a reasonable translation of an article from one of the two leading daily national newspapers in Poland. The answer is yes, it is a reasonable translation of the article. I am not making a judgment on the allegations in the article, just stating that it is what was written in Polish. The IP Editor is citing an article from a mainstream source in Poland. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:28, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, then ResidentAnth queried whether even if the translation was ok, was it the same person. I think that the book storyline fits exactly with the article storyline (bar the recent edition, obviously). Since the book uses Blaichman as his name, that s/b the article title etc. Yes? No? - Sitush (talk) 02:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• The IP Editor is from Poland coming in from a mobile/wireless connection from Plus. Possibly Warsaw. (apn-95-41-128-164.dynamic.gprs.plus.pl ) so definitely via a mobile connection - either a cell or more likely a gprs modem on a laptop. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• Two more articles from the paper Żołnierze AK chcą śledztwa and IPN zbada książkę ubeka.

• Newsweek Poland , Polish Radio , Jewish Institute in Poland , TVN24 , etc. Jut because it doesn't show up on CBS or the NYT doesn't mean that the story didn't exist. And never trust Google or Yahoo. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
  • That takes a pressure off us since multiple RS are reporting the same thing. Are they all treating treating the assertion the same? The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 02:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry but you are still missing my point. I searched for Bleichman because that is the name of the article. got very few hits. Then you introduced the alternative spelling & I can get loads of hits. In other words, the article (& the Holocaust museum page upon which it is based) appear to be using a mis-spelled name. The article needs renaming & then it needs sourcing with all these various items. You can do the translations <g> - Sitush (talk) 02:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

If you want to find it you have to search with the proper phrase in Polish - Franka Blaichmana. They appear to be all treating the assertion the same. I would add the original Polish in the article along with the proposed translation and footnote it with all the cited sources. It could easily be the the Holocaust Museum page is wrong with it's spelling. Ajh1492 (talk) 02:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Exactly ... and the article was a copy/paste of that museum's content. I'm starting to fix it now but ultimately will move the entire thing so that the article title also matches the authorial name.

Thank you all - and especially Ajh - for your help with this. I reckon that it is sorted now, unless anyone has any objections? - Sitush (talk) 02:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

• Glad to be of help. Ajh1492 (talk) 03:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Pratibha Patil

Pratibha Patil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The entry has outrageous and libelous comments that are unsubstantiated. The entry claims that Pratibha Patil lived with Allen Ginsburg in Varanasi and was involved with Timothy Leary. These claims are incotrect, abusive, and must be removed immediately from the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.72.232 (talk) 00:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the uncited statements. I agree that they may be detrimental to her. However, if someone does come up with a reliable, verifiable citation then you'll just have to live with it. All I could find in a quick search was blog entries and comments to recent news stories about Wikileaks on MSN News etc. I'm watching the page now. - Sitush (talk) 00:53, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Sarah-Jane Redmond

Sarah-Jane Redmond (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Television Work : Call Of The Wild : Guest Lead / The Unsinkable Molly Brown—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.8.189 (talk) 02:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

could you please clarify your statement? The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 02:47, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Cuyahoga Heights High School

Cuyahoga Heights High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Having second thoughts on a deletion

I deleted this as a BLP violation. Taking a second look, I see that the source is not a true blog, it's a Cleveland Plain Dealer article with reader comments enabled. Now I'm wondering if the item could be restored if the technology coordinator's name is omitted. Thoughts? --CliffC (talk) 03:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Its a reliable source. There are possible WP:NOTNEWS and WP:WEIGHT issues. The statement could be included that the district is under financial scrutiny, without getting into individuals and resignations--or left out for now just to see what develops. Jonathanwallace (talk) 03:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

If he's the technology coordinator for the whole school district, why should this be mentioned in the article of a single school? Gamaliel (talk) 06:56, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for those good points, I'll leave it deleted. --CliffC (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Ralph Drollinger

Ralph Drollinger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Would someone be able to take a look at the Ralph Drollinger article? The "Ministry" section has been subject to long-term edit wars. (The article has been brought to the BLP noticeboard before; see Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive99#Ralph_Drollinger.) Zagalejo^^^ 04:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I took a look and have watch-listed it. The information seems reliably sourced and relevant. Jonathanwallace (talk) 04:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

It should be noted that every user who has attempted to remove controversial information from the article from November 2010 until now has been blocked because they were sockpuppets of User:RK Drollinger (indeed, it was User:RK Drollinger who brought the article to Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive99#Ralph Drollinger). See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/RK Drollinger/Archive. OCNative (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Freda Payne

Freda Payne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Hello,

can You check the date of birth of Freda Payne and her middle name. In the "Guinness Encyclopedia of Popular Music" she was born September 19, 1945 and her middle name is "Charcilia". Joel Whitburn's book "Top Pop Singles" has the same date of birth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.71.79.161 (talk) 06:38, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I've corrected the spelling of her middle name in the article but a quick check of some databases shows both the 1942 and 1945 date. I suggest you post on the discussion page and discuss the matter with other editors. Gamaliel (talk) 06:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Mary G. Enig

Mary G. Enig (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Quick question about application of WP:BLPPRIMARY. This ref from a state government agency is being used as a reference (ref #2) for citing that Enig was a licensed nutritionist between 1988 and 2008. I rarely edit BLPs, and was wondering if this violates WP:BLPPRIMARY or not (public document, etc). Thanks! Yobol (talk) 12:22, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Mary G. Enig Link to article. Colincbn (talk) 14:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it falls under the BLPPPRIMARY ban on public records. Jonathanwallace (talk) 15:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that BLPPRIMARY is an actual ban on the use of government records. Just a very strong caution to how they are used. In fact, the policy in question specifically says there are times it is acceptable to use them in BLPs. Colincbn (talk) 05:55, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

BLPPRIMARY is categorical: "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person." This is a case of a public record being used to support an assertion that a living person was a licensed nutritionist for 20 years and is no longer. So its not a permissible usage. The exception stated in the section (using primary sources to supplement secondary) doesn't apply in this instance. Jonathanwallace (talk) 06:30, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Alejandro Peña Esclusa

Alejandro Peña Esclusa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Rd232 introduced slander and libel on this page Alejandro Peña Esclusa and is reverting all my attempts to remove it. I will continue to revert in spite of the 3 revert rule because this is a long-standing issue that has gone on for YEARS on the Italian Misplaced Pages article about this politician, who is presently a political prisoner in Venezuela. May I suggest that you ban Rd232 from editing that page. Lindorm (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lindorm (talk • contribs) 14:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Cough, not content to spew legal threats everywhere over an issue which got him banned from the Italian Misplaced Pages, not content with a spurious COIN report, he forumshops to BLPN too. Well I'm quite happy to have more eyes and hands involved. Rd232 15:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

User JRSP has joined the edit war on the side of Rd232, also reverting to a potentially libelous text, without addressing the concerns that I had previously expressed on the talk page. Lindorm (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Unless I'm misreading this diff, you appear to believe that merely moving the text and adding an WP:OR claim that the Venezuelan government is persecuting Esclusa solves the alleged libel problem. Hum. Also, you're at about 5RR. I can't be bothered to report you, especially as you appear to believe WP:BLP exemption applies, but really, can some others chip in here please? Rd232 15:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

You are partially right. By presenting the same information in a different manner it becomes a good Misplaced Pages article. The overall goal of an article is to be accurate and being accurate entails more than containing accurate facts, it means to convey an accurate impression of the subject. That is why the same sentences can be or not be libelous, depending on how they are presented and framed. Lindorm (talk) 16:55, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The problem continues: User Rd232 is contributing to improve the article, but at the same time consistently and persistently introducing biased (POV) language that reflects the propaganda message from Venezuela's socialist government. Every day I find myself having to clear about a half dozen or so biased (POV) features from the article. This has to stop, we cannot allow Misplaced Pages to be a propaganda vehicle for a dictatorship wishing to crush its dissidents by spreading patently false information that gets picked up by editors here and presented in the manner that they designed it to be presented. We have to use judgment! Lindorm (talk) 16:27, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm only adding sourced information; there are some disagreements which one ought to be able to work through without hyperventilating, and mostly we are. Incidentally, I've pointed this out several times, so here it is again, crystal clear: NPOV is the objective. The N in WP:NPOV stands for Neutral. That you can't get this straight suggests you never got round to even reading this key policy. Rd232 17:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Fixed typos (NPOV -> NNPOV, biased, POV). Rd232 undid a number of times revisions of that article without addressing the concerns I had expressed in edit comments and talk page, and continued many times to edit the article into a form that clearly gave more prominence to the views of the dissident's political enemies, than a balanced and neutral view. This long-term editing pattern of Rd232, editing in a way that is biased pro-Chavez and against regime dissidents, is very troubling, especially given that he is an Admin. It endangers the very credibility of the Misplaced Pages project, unless the project demonstrates that it is able to effectively handle the situation. Lindorm (talk) 11:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, user Rd232 is clearly working on that article as an editor and not as an administrator and I think if you ask him/her they will say as much...as I mentioned yesterday, you guys are discussing and clearly capable of working towards some agreements and meeting in the middle, remember - there is no deadline, choose a single issue you have with the content and either add a cited rebuttal or agree some consensus wording, for issues you are unable to agree on, its better to request outside comments such as using the Misplaced Pages:Third opinion for minor issues and WP:RFC on the talkpage for larger issues. You are both allowed to hold an opinion about the subject but requested to edit from a neutral point of view. WP:NPOV Off2riorob (talk) 11:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's irrelevant here that I'm an admin - I'm not wearing that hat. Lindorm seems to wish to use the article to promote his anti-Chavez activism, but is gradually, slowly, grasping what NPOV actually means and I think we've actually made a lot of progress, though his tone often doesn't reflect that. Dispute resolution remains an option, but the talk page has been a bit underused (for detailed editing issues) so far. Rd232 12:22, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Rd232 has finally given in and allowed the article to stand in an NPOV fashion, but it was a long fight to make him give up his pro-Chavez bias. Lindorm (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you've finally accepted that what I did was basically NPOV, and some tweaks here and there achieved some improvements that seem to leave you satisfied. If you call that "giving in"... well whatever makes you feel good. Rd232 16:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Lindorm please pack it in calling the kettle black, your anti Chavez position is like a lighthouse, you have a personal web blog that espouses that position. It was not a fight it was an editorial discussion, if a compromise has been agreed that is a reason to celebrate and make friends not to assert or claim victory. User:Rd232 is an experienced contributor and you would do well to listen and take advice when offered. Off2riorob (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Category:Rape victims

Hello! I am Minerva and I made the Category:Rape victims. That page was deleted before, I don't know the reason, but I want to know if it violates WP:BLP in some way. I would like to get some viewpoints here. --Minerva97 (talk) 17:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Minerva, without having spent time thinking about your question, I did want to at least point you at the 2007 deletion discussion that was the basis for the category originally being deleted, it's here. That discussion also evoked a comment from Jimbo, here. --joe decker 18:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about this, but is there any way we can speedily delete the category? It was deleted in 2007, and Misplaced Pages has become much stricter on BLP issues since then. Having looked at the previous discussion, I can't believe for one minute that this would survive another deletion debate. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Aside from how mind-boggingly offensive such a category is, the fact that it currently holds only 7 indivduals, when it clearly could hold thousands, is itself a sign of how unfeasible it is to have a category. Are we to have subcategories for survivors of incest, of children abused by teachers, etc etc etc? This should be culled from wikipedia asap. Echoedmyron (talk) 18:29, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of tagging it now. Tarc (talk) 18:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm the editor who recommended that Minerva97 bring the category up for discussion here. I didn't realize it had previously been deleted, but I did think it posed a problem both in terms of BLP and as inconsistent with the other subcategories of Category:Crime victims. Though I disagree with some of the objections being made here, I agree that the category is not really a good one. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Allison Parks and other Playmates

Allison Parks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This Playboy Playmate of the Year is reported to have died in 2010. No genuine RS reference confirms that the person who died was in fact the Playboy model; the association is made via self-published sources associated with a Yahoo fan group. Tracing the history, it appears that most of the information supporting the identification was in the WP article long before the person died, so the identification appears reasonably reliable -- but still falls well short of BLP/RS standards. Other articles report Playmate deaths with far less reliable sourcing, mostly coming from mailing lists -- see Cathy Larmouth, Debbie Boostrom, Melodye Prentiss, and Tiffany Sloan. There are probably more. How should the situation be handled? Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

If you ask my opinion, what you need is an obituary that confirms that this is the same person; at minimum matching birth dates and rudimentary biographical information that confirms something else reliable about the person, if the obit doesn't mention Playboy appearence. I.e. if one source confirms that Jane Doe the playboy model was born on Date XXX, was born in city YYY, attended high school ZZZ, and the obit states that a Jane Doe, born on XXX in YYY and went to high school ZZZ died on AAA, then you are probably safe, even if the obit doesn't mention the Playboy appearence. However, if its just "Jane Doe died on AAA" with no confirmational data, or if the sources are all unreliable, it should be taken out of the article until such time as a firm, reliable source is found. --Jayron32 20:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Local obituaries are easy to find. A newspaper database like News Bank or Lexis/Nexis makes it even easier. I wouldn't even cite a Yahoo fan group to prove that Yahoo exists. Gamaliel (talk) 20:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Michael Frost Beckner

Michael Frost Beckner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Michael Frost Beckner, the subject of this Misplaced Pages article is a living person. I am an associate of Mr. Beckner and have contributed the bulk of this article with his direct knowledge and guidance.

An anonymous editor is repeatedly posting a false, unsourced, irrelevant and potentially libelous statement about Beckner's original, and entirely fictional story for his original screenplay, "Spy Game". This anonymous editor also attempted to insert the same information into the Spy Game article. Editors of that page removed the inappropriate addition and explained their decision in its discussion section.

The inappropriate text can be found in the Diff page:

Mr. Beckner has never heard of this person and has confirmed this statement is a complete fabrication. Beckner's continued value as a writer of original fiction is undermined by this statement so it must be considered libelous.

The anonymous editor cites his references as:

1. "http://tvprnews.com/television_articles/2010/05/two-film-production-companies-plan-to-fund-and-produce-documentary-films-in-mexico-151910.htm"

--This is a PR news release made by Tom Golden's own company and merely repeats his false statements.

2. "http://latesthollywoodnewsrelease.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html"

--This is a blog article that repeats the false information from the PR release. The author of this blog article has been contacted and notified about the error.

3. "The Hollywood Reporter, Nov 20, 2003, Cathy Dunkley 'The Beckner Story'"

--This article does not exist. The anonymous editor simply changed the date of one of the actual references in the Beckner article and took Beckner's company's name (The Beckner Story Company) fabricating a new title for the article. Additionally, the cited author did not work for the Hollywood Reporter in 2003. She worked for Variety at the time (ref: http://www.variety.com/toc-archive/2003/20031117.html, 11/20/2003, Cathy Dunkley, Dana Harris, "Village Roadshow taps marketing, distrib exec" Dwwinter (talk) 21:54, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know about this issue. If the IP editor is fabricating sources in this way then it's very concerning. I have left them a warning on their talk page and have watchlisted the article. If they keep re-adding the same material without discussing the disputed sources, then we can consider some form of protection for the article. Incidentally, you may wish to read our guidelines on conflict of interest. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I just did a database search of the Hollywood Reporter and that article does not appear to exist, nor anything written by Dunkley. Beckner does pop in three articles, but none from 2003 and none of them mention Golden. Gamaliel (talk) 22:30, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Dwwinter's own contributions don't seem to hold up much better. Large chunks of the article were poorly sourced/unsourced promotion; some of his sources seem quite dodgy ("Fortean Times" on US intelligence agencies?!), and other text clearly distorts the sources cited (eg, the EW article "Blue Chip Scripts" states exactly nothing about "the highest prices ever paid for spec scripts up until that time" -- it only presents a selection of high prices paid. Anybody who thinks that statements like "By this time Beckner was firmly established as the most prolific and foremost visual storyteller of espionage in Hollywood" belong in a Misplaced Pages biography needs to go back to square one, read WP:BLP, and inform his client/employer/whatever that Misplaced Pages is not a vehicle for advertising. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

wilbert keon

Wilbert Keon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

A user has repeatedly removed negative yet factual and referenced information on this person's biography.

Please see the diff:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Wilbert_Keon&action=historysubmit&diff=422237156&oldid=421777539

Can this article be locked or the user in question be blocked from further vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curiousottman (talk • contribs) 02:42, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Everyone involved in this edit dispute should be encouraged to use edit summaries and to discuss their issues on the article Talk page. WP:BLPREMOVE says: "Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced..." The link you are using is a connection to a site which claims to be an aggregator of interesting information, and which is presenting what purports to be an Ottawa Citizen article. This may be a copyright violation, or may not be an accurate copy of the article. For something this sensitive, you need a better source. On a quick Google search, I did not find a better source, so I have deleted the information from the article. If you can solve that problem, you may still hear from other editors here with objections on other grounds such as WP:UNDUE. Personally, I believe that the information should remain under WP:WELLKNOWN, only if it can be much better documented.Jonathanwallace (talk) 04:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages would be better off if we deleted all of the celebrity DUIs, one-night stands, and similar transient public embarrassments. Almost all of them are given undue weight. "Factual and referenced" doesn't mean significant enough to be included in an encyclopedic article. It's also interesting to note that the "factual" content you're insistent on keeping is itself misleading, since the article subject's resignation was rejected, and he stayed in his post for almost a decade more. And since when does disputing an edit twice over 10 months constitute impermissible edit warring? Especially if the complaint comes from someone who reinserted the same content twice in only a few days. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 04:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Since I reverted the edit, we're talking in the abstract here. However, the example given in WP:WELLKNOWN, which is policy, is: " A politician is alleged to have had an affair. He or she denies it, but The New York Times publishes the allegations, and there is a public scandal. The allegation belongs in the biography, citing The New York Times as the source." Jonathanwallace (talk) 04:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, well known is part of BLP policy - "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented, it belongs in the article" - Currently there is only a single external to his official biography, so I was asking myself how public a person is he? Another issue would be weight with such almost nothing known about his private life, which this occurred in, I would say it would get undue weight in the article also a HW says, it actually had little effect on his life, he continued along in the same position. His public figure position would be at the senate - I don't know how public this actually would be considered, he was not elected and so did not stand as a candidate. IMO the lack of citations suggests he is more of a private person than public. Anyways, under the present conditions and cited to that source I agree its better out than in. Off2riorob (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

This is an easy one because we all agree on the deletion. However, I think he is a public figure as a senate member, regardless of whether he is appointed or elected. I agree that the "multitude' of sources envisioned by WP:WELLKNOWN are lacking. Jonathanwallace (talk) 13:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Cool, if its replaced without any changes or discussion I recommend semi protection, I will watchlist it also, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 13:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

David Di Sabatino

David Di Sabatino (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• - David Di Sabatino#Background and Education

I am David Di Sabatino. This article is about me, and it is simply riddled with wrong information.

Please take it down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.65.68 (talk) 04:40, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Could you be more specific and let us know what is incorrect? Thanks. Jonathanwallace (talk) 04:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

• - One thing that is incorrect is that someone that claims to the subject of a BLP who makes a report here and it take eight hours for them to receive a welcome template or any policy or guideline advice at all. (note - this is not directed at anyone, just something to consider in general) - Off2riorob (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup, missed that--good catch. Jonathanwallace (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that the fact that the IP followed up the complaint here with an immediate act of vandalism both reduced its credibility and the inclination editors might have had to welcome it. That's not something most folks would do under their real name. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I missed that. Off2riorob (talk) 18:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Jas Dhillon

Jas Dhillon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Look like a vanity publication to me. 38.98.7.86 (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC) JF

I did a bit of tidying, he is of limited note, could use improvement if there are additional reports out there. Article has existed since May 2008 doesn't appear to have ever been prodded ... might survive a WP:prod. Off2riorob (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

A Google search didn't disclose any third party sources of the type we favor, mainly his own web site and social media. Jonathanwallace (talk) 19:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

PROD'd. Jonathanwallace (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Abdul Nazer Mahdani

Abdul Nazer Mahdani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This article is a stub, it lacks a neutral point of view and most of the claims made by the article are not verifiable. Most of its external links are dead too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vyttilavarkey (talk • contribs) 18:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

IMHO without checking all the links, just a sample, they worked. The wording does not seem to be POV (I have never heard of the person before). For someone who has a specific view about the person it might seem POV by being NPOV. This is a person considered to be a political prisoner it seems, although it is not expressly said in the text. In cases of this kind it is notoriously difficult to get good sources since media inside the country have to be careful, and media outside have little reason to write about it nor much information to base their writing on. However, the article needs a bit more text to explain the context. Lindorm (talk) 11:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Matt Howarth

Would any editor be able to take a look at Matt Howarth? Apparently he is a cartoonist of some kind, but the whole article looks like a vanity to me. Most of the info is gleaned from . Thanks. Jimsteele9999 (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a lousy article, but Howarth is quite notable in his field. Article history shows the likelihood of vanity editing to be pretty low. One IP may have copied a laundry list of guest appearances from the website, but that's a cleanup issue at worst. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

He's important but not mainstream, so sources may be difficult to dig up. I'll see what I can find. Gamaliel (talk) 19:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

He drew a bit for DC comics and has a minor note but no more than that - imo there are about five articles that could easily be merged there without any loss to readers. Off2riorob (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Taryn Southern

Taryn Southern (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This is a messy bio of someone who achieved brief fame in the 2008 American election cycle for a viral video. She describes herself on her website as a "Webutante". It's almost completely unsourced (i'm not counting "the Wrong Hole" on Youtube as a source!) The early life section contains some eyebrow-raising claims, such as her two degrees by age twenty (if this is true, much respect Ms.Southern) I'm thinking this needs to be stubbed right down, or even AfD'ed. Thoughts? The Interior (Talk) 22:51, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

• Oh, it's an awful article, no doubt. A quick look at Google News (and the IMDB, and the ARS) tells me that AfD probably is not the best place to go--she is certainly marginally notable. But stubbing seems fine to me. Drmies (talk) 04:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Bill Vorn

Bill Vorn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I already wrote about it in the talk page of Bill Vorn, but I thought it would be better to bring it up here. It seems like there has been a "copying and pasting" from his personal website. What should be done about this? Edit it so as to make it seem original, or simply erase that portion of the article? Or should it simply be re-written? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourhomeplanet (talk • contribs) 03:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• You're right--that does seem like a copy and paste job. That is not acceptable for various reasons, including copyright issues--and I don't see permission for such copying. Here's what I'm going to do, and you can do this as well. I'm going to go through the history to find an untainted version if I can. If I can, I'll revert to that and take it from there. If this was copied from the get-go, I'm going to find a few reliable sources on this character and write a stub using the sources I can find, deleting the rest of it (which is then unverified). If I can't find any sources, I will nominate it for deletion.

  That's what I think should be done, but there are other options--rewriting certainly is an option, but it begs the question of sources: this is a BLP, after all. Tagging it with a bunch of templates is also an option. Thanks for letting us now. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Dieudonné M'bala M'bala

Dieudonné M'bala M'bala (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) The following is from WP:Editor assistance. I think the discussion really belongs here. Hans Adler 08:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Template:Blockquotetop There is not a correspondence in translation between the french page and the english one in the french text is clear that the actor was accused of anti-semitism and to be rightist, but also that he reject those accuses in the english text instead the translation give him a sure appartenance to the Front National party and his leader Jean Marie Le Pen, i am not agree a translation have to be strictly tied to the original text and not allow anyone to interpretate facts with personal opinions, I think that the cause is that who did it hated Dieudonné for his anti zionism and used Misplaced Pages non in an honest way, i wish in a correction as soon as possible, cause what i saw in my research is absurde and show how much can be manipulated the information :

Dieudonné, nom de scène de Dieudonné M'bala M'bala, est un humoriste, acteur, et militant politique français né le 11 février 1966 à Fontenay-aux-Roses (Hauts-de-Seine). Dieudonné se fait connaître comme humoriste dans les années 1990. Dans la deuxième moitié de cette décennie, il est de plus en plus engagé en politique, participant notamment à plusieurs scrutins électoraux. Particulièrement controversé en raison de plusieurs de ses prises de position, Dieudonné voit son image publique se modifier progressivement au cours des années 20001 : alors qu'il était classé à gauche dans les années 19902, il est désormais condamné par diverses associations antiracistes et considéré comme une personnalité d'extrême droite par de nombreuses formations et mouvances politiques3, ainsi que par une grande partie de la presse nationale1,2,4, qui l'accusent notamment d'antisémitisme5,6. Lui-même conteste ces accusations et se présente comme un républicain antisioniste anticommunautariste7, affirmant représenter « la vraie gauche »8. Dieudonné

Dieudonné M'bala M'bala (born 11 February 1966), generally known simply as Dieudonné, is a French comedian, actor and political activist. Initially a leftist, and an anti-racism and anti-Israel activist, he has moved to the far right of the political spectrum of France, developing close political and personal relationships with the Front National party and its leader Jean-Marie Le Pen as well as with prominent Holocaust deniers such as Robert Faurisson; however, he claims to be leading a 'justified fight' against Zionism, and Israel which he deems racist and oppressive. Dieudonné has been condemned in court several times for antisemitic remarks. Since 1997, Dieudonné has regularly stood in parliamentary and European Union elections as a candidate at the head of fringe or splinter parties, and has tried and failed to run for two French presidential elections (2002 and 2007). Dieudonné M'bala M'bala —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.239.124.46 (talk) 01:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The place to post this is at Talk:Dieudonné M'bala M'bala where it can be seen by editors who an interest in the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually no, I think the best place is WP:BLP/N as this is clearly a BLP matter. I am moving this conversation there. Hans Adler 08:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Template:Blockquotebottom

I don't have the time to deal with this right now, but I note that the English Misplaced Pages article is not supposed to be a translation of the French one. For French people the French Misplaced Pages is likely to have more detailed and more NPOV coverage than we do, but there is no guarantee that this is the case. Without actually having looked at it, I guess carefully considering the French article and its history in addition to ours could in fact help us here. Hans Adler 08:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

There is no built in relationship between English and French or any other language Misplaced Pages. We can have articles on the same topic which are completely unrelated to each other in their origins, wording and sources. In the case of an article originally translated from French Misplaced Pages, the editor may chose not to include all of the material and references, or may diverge from them if there is a good reason to. Once that translation becomes an article here, it can be edited by anybody and will continue to diverge from the original. So the only real question for consideration here is whether the statements which are causing your concern are reliably sourced, give proper weight etc. I will take a look at the article and see if I spot any issues. Jonathanwallace (talk) 10:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I read the article, randomly checking a few of the French language sources. They are mainly large circulation, mainstream newspapers that say what they are cited for. The guy has staked out some pretty clear positions on French Jews and Israel. There is some coatracky material and a broken link or two. On the whole, the article seems to have been written or heavily edited by someone who wants to make sure the world knows the subject is an anti-Semite, so there may be weight issues (though if someone is notable mainly for bigotry, there may not be that much you can do to add "balance" to an article). This probably warrants an edit, cutting out some of the more extraneous, coatracky material (for example, one of his colleague's correspondence with Carlos the Jackal in prison). Jonathanwallace (talk) 10:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

luc tuymans

Luc Tuymans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

before 11 feb 2011 there were details on the family of the artist which could explain his political engagement this info was canceled on 11/02/2011 and i regret this because it was an essential point of view —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.130.203.162 (talk) 08:57, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not seeing a February 11 edit, and am having trouble finding the former content to which you refer. Can you give more details? Jonathanwallace (talk) 11:32, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Nikki Yanofsky

Nikki Yanofsky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Sources seem clear enough to me in support of our stating in our article that Nikki Yanofsky is Jewish, yet it is being objected to. It is being discussed at Talk:Nikki Yanofsky#Religious Views. Can we have further input from others?

It was brought here previously, by me. There is an additional source at this point in time. Here we have the previous discussion at this Noticeboard. Bus stop (talk) 15:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone explain why her apparently being of Jewish descent is of any significance to her notability, or indeed of any significance to the article at all? Or is this just another example of Bus Stop's obsessive ethno-tagging project. (BTW, has anyone ever seen him demonstrating this obsession with other ethnicities?) AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Apparently, according to the article, it is a prominent part of her parents life, though her parents are not notable outside of the fact of being her parents. I personally don't see anything wrong with the current version. I do think it is obsessive ethno-tagging, but there is nothing wrong with mentioning her family background.Griswaldo (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Re Andy, I thinks this is indeed simply more of Bus Stop's obsessive ethno-tagging project, and no, I've never seem him demonstrating this obsession with other ethnicities. It's clear from the sources that her parents are quite active in the Jewish community, but it's not at all clear that the daughter shares this self-identification. Many religions and religious people, including Jewish newspaper sources, assume that a child is of the same religion as the parents: however, this is simply not true and kids frequently rebel. Niki may well consider herself a Buddhist or a Pagan or an athiest, we have no way of knowing unless she says. Given that she's a minor and hasn't make any declaration of religious affiliation, the most we can state in the article is that she is born into a Jewish family. Most people will read that as a Jewish identification and we've not put any possibly false statements into the article in the process.

As for Bus Stop's weak synthesis using such details as going home for Passover: many people go home for social events such as Christmas, Easter, Passover, and join in even though they don't consider themselves Christian or Jewish. It's a social thing and proves nothing. Yworo (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

But we do have sourcesThe following 5 excerpts from 2 sources would I think pretty clearly serve to establish for Misplaced Pages purposes that Yanofsky is Jewish:

"Jewish artist records Vancouver Olympic theme song".

"Jewish jazz sensation Nikki Yanofsky’s career continues to blossom."

"Along the way, Yanofsky was mentored by many other Jewish artists, such as the composer Marvin Hamlisch, who featured her at age 14 at a Carnegie Hall performance in New York."

"“Performing in Israel was so moving. How can anyone, Jewish or not Jewish, not feel connected to the people there? I enjoyed not only performing there, but seeing all the landmarks in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. I definitely want to come back to Israel as often as possible,” Yanofsky said."

"“She comes from a close-knit Jewish family. Her parents, Richard and Elyssa, who manage her career, support many Jewish causes, including the Israel Cancer Research Fund. The singer will be home next month to celebrate a Passover seder with her parents and two brothers ." Bus stop (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Here we go again... Can you explain why her apparently being of Jewish descent is of any significance to her notability, or indeed of any significance to the article at all? If you can't, then your obsessions are best directed elsewhere. Misplaced Pages isn't intended to be therapy... — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyTheGrump (talk • contribs)

All the sources presented above which actually say she is Jewish (only the first two) are Jewish news sources which don't explain how they know she considers herself Jewish, they make assumptions and don't provide sources for their claims. The rest are unusable because they rely on implication or interpretation, which we don't allow on any articles, much less BLPs. None of the last three directly state that she is Jewish. They say some other artists are Jewish, that Yanovsky found performing in Israel "moving", that her parents are Jewish, and that she will be at home for Passover. I attend seders, but that doesn't mean I'm Jewish. None of these are reliable sources for this specific detail, and none establish that even if she is Jewish that it is a significant part of her notability. Now, if you had some non-Jewish sources that state that she is Jewish and how this relates to her singing career or otherwise contributes to her notability, that would be different. Having the Jewish community note that she is Jewish doesn't really mean anything for the general notability of her alleged Jewishness. The fact that other, non-Jewish, sources don't even mention it means it is not significant to her notability. If it were, it would get mentioned in the non-Jewish sources. Yworo (talk) 17:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I also note that the "five" sources you present above are only two sources. The first two are one article, the last three another article. When you present sources, please try to do it in a way that is not misleading about the number of sources involved, hmmm... Yworo (talk) 17:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yworo—the content of an article is not limited to that which shows a clear relation to notability according to my reading of policy:

"Notability does not directly affect the content of articles, but only their existence."

"These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not directly limit the content of an article or list." Bus stop (talk) 18:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Nope. What limits this is discussion on the talk page with regard to reaching an editorial decision regarding the significance of such matters. As always, it is for those wishing to assert significance to provide evidence of such. So where is this evidence to be found? AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, Yworo—you seem to call for "non-Jewish" sources. Do you find support for that in policies, guidelines, and essays?

And you say the 2 reliable sources I've provided "don't explain how they know she considers herself Jewish". Do you have a source that would show that she might not consider herself Jewish? Bus stop (talk) 18:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

They are not reliable source for this particular piece of information because they are sources which have a bias with respect to that particular piece of information. So you have no reliable sources. Furthermore, it's not simply a matter of whether or not she is Jewish, it's a matter or whether or not her alleged Jewishness is part of her notability. Jewish sources can't establish that. Yworo (talk) 19:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yworo—you say, "…it's a matter or whether or not her alleged Jewishness is part of her notability."

I find at WP:NOTE that:

"Notability does not directly affect the content of articles, but only their existence."

and:

"These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not directly limit the content of an article or list."

As applied to our article, wouldn't the above policy imply that "Jewishness" need not be "part of her notability"? Bus stop (talk) 20:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

No. It would imply that you should read the next sentence in the notability guidelines: "For Misplaced Pages's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Misplaced Pages is not, and Biographies of living persons". Now provide evidence of significance, or stop wasting everyone's time with your facile wikilawyering. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yworo—we require reliable sources. You have not demonstrated that The Jewish Tribune and the Canadian Jewish News are not reliable sources. Like all news organizations they have their reputation to protect.

So far you have not pointed to wording in policies, guidelines, and essays that might guide us in evaluating sources in the way that you are suggesting. Where do you find differentiation between sources on this basis? Bus stop (talk) 20:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

AndyTheGrump—you say, "provide evidence of significance". Note that at this point in the article's evolution, it is not being suggested that this particular characteristic be expanded upon. All that is being suggested, by me, is that it be perfunctorily noted. Do you think there has to be great significance—like she has to be basing jazz syncopation on cantorial rhythms? Bus stop (talk) 21:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Since you have still provided no evidence whatsoever to demonstrate why Yanofsky's Jewish descent is of any significance, I'd assume that there isn't any. On that basis, there is nothing to debate here. Can somebody hat this section please? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• - I am not seeing any support for her having any religious views, is there some support for that claim? Off2riorob (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Off2riorob—you say you see no "religious views." Bear in mind that Misplaced Pages is "not finished". If "religious views" come to light they can be added at a later time. Bus stop (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

note - the post above from user:bus stop is posted out of the timeline and confuses the discussion making it look like a post from user Griswaldo is a reply to the user bus stops post but this is false, the post above is actually posted after the one below - Yes, indeedy, but that is not the question - so clearly we have not reliable support for her religiousness. As I had a look at the content and the reliable support is very good at present and without more reliable reports this is well resolved, a quality update, thanks to all. Off2riorob (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Bus Stop, are you unhappy with the current state of the entry, which mentions her Jewish upbringing but says nothing about her own identity? If you are happy with the current state then there is nothing more to discuss. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 21:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Off2riorob—you mention "religiousness" but of course that is not the issue. This was my edit to the Yanofsky article:

"Yanofsky is Jewish and was born and raised in Hampstead, a Montreal suburb and she now attends St. George's School of Montreal. Her parents presently manage her career."

I believe the above edit to the Personal life section of the article, made by me, is completely supported by sources. In fact, that is the primary issue here. Is the assertion that "Yanofsky is Jewish" supported by sources? I think that is what we should be primarily be discussing. Bus stop (talk) 22:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you please stop posting in discussion format, engorged and elongated comments in links? what part of don't you understand? Off2riorob (talk) 22:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

You need to stop this is a repeat issue with you adding "Nikki/Jonny/Harry - who is a Jew" as if it is a primary notability. George who is Christian ... its your primary interest but not readers or wikipedias. Off2riorob (talk) 23:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

No. What we should be discussing is whether the fact that Yanofsky is of Jewish descent is of any significance to the article. Since you utterly refuse to explain why you see any significance to this, I can only assume that you consider imposing your own neuroses on Misplaced Pages as more important than the stated aims of the project. On this basis, I would support a call for you to be topic banned from any BLPs of persons of Jewish descent, ethnicity or faith. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Support - topic ban for user bus stop from any BLPs of persons of Jewish descent, ethnicity or faith. its a repeat issue. Off2riorob (talk) 23:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Support - I've brought this up on AN/I before and failed to establish as topic ban; however, Bus Stop's behavior appears to have gotten even more obsessive since then and I still support a topic ban. Yworo (talk) 15:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

AndyTheGrump, Off2riorob—do you want Misplaced Pages to be a petty battleground? Two sources devote considerable commentary to Yanofsky being Jewish. One of those sources entitles its article, "Jewish artist records Vancouver Olympic theme song". Are you sure it is not one or both of you that should have your editing activities curtailed? Jewish identity for the subject of a WP:BLP can be stated in a straightforward way—if doing so is adequately supported by sources. That is what this discussion should have been about. Unfortunately my intentions to keep this discussion civil and especially on topic are taxed considerably by the battleground mentality that utilizes calls for "topic bans" as a response that should have addressed the issue at hand. All Jews are not merely "from a Jewish family." If sources say that they themselves are indeed Jewish, it should be within the realm of possibility for Misplaced Pages to adhere to such sources. Bus stop (talk) 23:37, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The petty battleground is your own mentality, even worse it that your battleground and issue is genetic and religious. Off2riorob (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Bus Stop, the issue at hand is whether Yanofsky being of Jewish descent is actually of any significance to the article. You utterly refuse to address this, and instead endlessly drone on about 'reliable sources', when reliability isn't the issue, but relevance. It is this refusal to communicate, combined with an endless pushing of the same absurd POV regarding labelling anyone possible as 'Jewish', that indicates your lack of concern for Misplaced Pages, and your utter disregard for objectivity regarding this question. This is why I suggested a topic ban. I've no doubt you could do useful work elsewhere on the project if you ceased pursuing this obsession of yours. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Yea, bus stop...are you interested in anything apart from jews? Off2riorob (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Simple sourcing question. If she's sourced as being Jewish, having Jewish parents, being of Jewish descent, believing in Judaism, "growing up Jewish", etc., that's a biographical fact and can be included as such. Whether it's worth including and how you word it (and I'm offering no opinion there) is a matter of editorial discretion, but a blanket abstract claim that one shouldn't mention a person's connection to Judaism unless it's sourced as being relevant to notability is clearly not in accordance with our content policies and guidelines. "Relevant to notability" has been repeatedly proposed and rejected as a standard for content generally, and there's nothing special about Jewishness that would require a higher standard. If the sources are unclear you have a WP:V issue. There's no BLP issue unless the sources are weak or in conflict. This is basic stuff. Let's move on, please. I'll assume good faith about the original poster's asking of this question, but everyone else ought to lay off on using yet another forum as a WP:BATTLEGROUND for personal attacks or efforts to remove mention of Jewish ethnicity from the encyclopedia. If this behavior continues it's heading for behavioral RfCs or Arbcom, which is an unpleasant process unlikely to yield results that satisfy anyone.- Wikidemon (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, the 'biographical facts' you state are not actually sourced, beyond her having Jewish parents. Secondly though, you are not addressing the question I have repeatedly asked Bus Stop: why is Yanofsky being of Jewish descent of any significance to the article? As for this going to 'behavioural RfCs or Arbcom' then if that occurs, so be it. Maybe this will finally settle the issue one way or another, and if the ethnio-taggers win, I'm sure they will all be happy in their endeavours to compile Tag-a-Jew-pedia, regardless of the diminishing credibility of the project. After all, it isn't here for the readers, but as therapy for the contributors... AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikidemon - please read the citations previous to commenting, vague comments are worse than constructive, thanks Off2riorob (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

(ec - before the above 2 comments) I've taken a quick look, and it's not entirely clear to me that there is strong sourcing to say she is Jewish in the first place. The sources are nominally reliable but the actual references seem to be passing and indirect - of the "like other Jewish artists..." variety in Jewish special interest publications, not a strong source flat out saying "She is Jewish" or "Her parents were Jewish" (in the latter case we would say just that, about her parents and not her). Weak sources do create a BLP question as noted. (after ec) Being of Jewish faith, background, religion, ethnicity, and/or parentage is a biographically relevant fact in its own right, like being born in a certain place or a certain year, attending a particular school, gender and nationality, or who one's parents are. We don't need to source the importance of any of these, we just report them when the sources do. The "tag-a-Jew" comment is rude and offensive; please desist from mocking people who don't share your opinion on the biographical implcations of being Jewish. - Wikidemon (talk) 00:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

And you can demonstrate that there are biographical implications for Yanofsky being of Jewish descent ('Jewish' is ambiguous in this context)? AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

No, no need to demonstrate the biographical implications of each biographical fact. That's not how biographies work here or anywhere else. If a person's parents were Jewish, or seamstresses, or from Poland, we just lay out the facts. - Wikidemon (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

No, we make editorial decisions on which 'facts' to include in an article, based on their significance. Neither you nor Bus Stop have provided any evidence whatever in this regard. If you can't explain why something should be included, it shouldn't be. Or should we start adding shoe size to biographies? AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Start adding shoe size? It's already in Template:Infobox adult biography and Template:Infobox model, among others, and, assuming my memory isn't failing, I've removed a lengthy excursion on the subject from Uma Thurman. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

(ec) I don't know who this "we" is you're referring to, because it certainly does not reflect the practice of Misplaced Pages editors or others writing biographies. I'm not going to engage you in yet another mock debate over your strange proposition that Jewishness isn't a fit subject for the encyclopedia. You want to compare it to shoe size and other nonsense, please take that somewhere else. We get it, you don't think Jewishness is relevant to people's life story so it shouldn't be mentioned. But this is a BLP notice board, not a vehicle for removing ethnicity from the encyclopedia. If the subject is reliably sourced, the subject is reliably sourced. If not, it isn't. - Wikidemon (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

If it can be demonstrated that "Jewishness is relevant to people's life story", and in particular, that it is relevant to a biography that only exists because of a person's notability, then yes, if an argument is made that this is significant, then this should be considered for inclusion. What should not occur is what a few editors routinely engage in - looking for sources to demonstrate that person X is of their favourite ethnicity, in order to add another person to their list - this is basically stamp-collecting (or bus spotting?), applied to people. It us utterly unencyclopaedic, and serves no useful purpose other than to reinforce the ridiculous stereotypes that go with 'ethnicity'. It adds no useful content whatsoever to articles, except for those who share the same unhealthy obsession with shoving people into ethnic boxes - something that I'd have thought (perhaps naively), those with Jewish roots might be a little wary of. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:33, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Please take derisive comments about other editors somewhere else, not here. If you think downplaying ethnicity will make the world a more tolerant place, you're perfectly welcome to that opinion. But insulting people who think otherwise is rude to your fellow editors, offensive to some, and off topic. Again, I'm not going to debate you. You've come to this board many times, and debated me before, over your campaigns to remove various ethnic-related content from the encyclopedia. If you have a content-related proposal that's what article talk pages are for. If you have a policy proposal to change how Misplaced Pages describes ethnic identity there are plenty of policy pages to discuss that. If you're going to be realistic about things you've got an uphill battle there because most people are just fine mentioning that someone is Jewish (or some other ethnicity, parentage, or religion) if the sources say so. This notice board relates to poorly sourced contentious statements about living people, not a decision on whether to include sourced material or not. - Wikidemon (talk) 03:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

"This notice board relates to poorly sourced contentious statements about living people, not a decision on whether to include sourced material or not". Exactly. The correct place for such disputes is the article talk page, where the significance of such issues can better be debated. Bus Stop brought the issue here because he was losing the debate. Mainly because his obsession with labelling people as 'Jewish' is seen for what it is - an obsession that has little to do with article content, and everything to do with his own wish to apply stereotypes. I note that like Bus Stop, you don't actually offer any reason as to why Yanofsky's ethnic background should be included in the bio, beyond the fact that it can be sourced. Since Misplaced Pages isn't intended as an ethnobureaucratic database (as far as I'm aware), one would at least hope that those wishing to engage in such practices would offer a better justification for doing so than 'because I want to, and I've got sources...'. So tell us why it is of relevance... AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:24, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Ethnic background / religion / parentage / national origin / etc. reliably sourced -> ethnic background / religion / parentage / national origin / etc. can be mentioned in bio. If an uncontroverted plurality of reliable sources say that someone's parents are/were Jewish then we can say in their bio article that their parents are/were Jewish. It's as simple as that and I'm not going to jump down a rabbit hole debating the whys and wherefores of such a basic biographical principle or the larger social issues behind it. I don't particularly care what axe you have to grind about the motivations of Bus Stop or any other editor. You obviously care about this in the context of avoiding stereotypes and oppression. I've already said that the way you have expressed some of that stuff is off-putting and potentially offensive to some. It's obvious from the state of articles, and the policy / guideline pages, that most people are okay with mentioning ethnicity if sourced rather than systematically downplaying it. That's the state of consensus on Misplaced Pages, and how bios are written off Misplaced Pages. Aggressively confronting people on the subject is not going to help win them to your case to downplay ethnicity. At this point we're talking in circles, and we've talked about this exact issue a number of times before, here and elsewhere. - Wikidemon (talk) 05:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

- This was resolved earlier, its simple biographical detail, she is from a Jewish family, thats worthy of note in her bio, a simple comment like what we have - basically, unless she was adopted its an ethnic claim, its her roots - we have a cite for that she was brought up in a Jewish home and that is in the article - I don't see any reason in the right context not to mention that. There is no citations that dispute the claim ...so ....What we don't know is if she goes to synagogues or is spiritual or religious or any of that, so we just add what we have, it just needs care and close reporting of the citations. One of the reasons such is an issue is because of the diaspora and the persecution, Jewish ethnicity was often hidden. If cited it is worthy of note in a simple comment. This is back here repeatedly, we need to give a little and just present ethnic issues like this in a reasonable way. Its not a part of her notability , just a simple fact of her life story and who she is and where her roots come from. Off2riorob (talk) 13:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

If no one objects to the current state of the article I'd like to close this discussion. This thread is not the right place for a more general discussion about the relevance of ethnicity in BLPs. I have my own opinion on that subject, but it's not worth sharing here. Can we please stop this discussion unless there is a current BLP issue that isn't resolved. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 13:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Off2riorob—are you an expert on Judaism? You say, "What we don't know is if she goes to synagogues or is spiritual or religious or any of that…" Sources say that Nikki Yanofsky is Jewish. Why are you questioning sources? Sources need not provide the details that you request—unless you are presenting yourself as an expert in the subject of Judaism. If at some future point information becomes available to us, that is reliably sourced, concerning synagogue attendance or any of the other points that you mention, then at that point such material can be added to our article. Misplaced Pages is not really ever finished. Related information that is unavailable shouldn't obviate inclusion of that information that is presently available and reliably sourced. In my opinion the salient question is: do we have sufficient sourcing to say that Nikki Yanofsky is Jewish? I think we do. (AndyTheGrump raises what I think is a secondary question: should we include that even if it is well-sourced?) My argument is that we do not have to beat around the bush as far as Nikki Yanofsky's Jewishness is concerned. We need not consign her Jewishness to the present wording, "…was born and raised in a 'close-knit Jewish family'". There is more to it than that. In my reading of sources, they are saying also that Nikki Yanofsky is Jewish. While it is true that she was raised in a Jewish family, the more pertinent point is that she is Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The way that the wiki works is that luckily all contributors edit articles - you are not required to be an expert of Jewish issues, luckily, such restrictive contributions would result in Jewish articles written by Jewish people for Jewish people, what we are looking for is a world view , a global understanding and presentation of this topic and not a narrow introspective involved position. As for your comments, you seem like a single voice with your position and as such your points have been rebutted previously and are unworthy of repeated response. Off2riorob (talk) 13:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Off2riorob—you say we are looking for a "world view , a global understanding". I don't think that is correct. In my opinion we are looking for adherence to sources. Opinions can vary on just what constitutes a "world view , a global understanding". But the importance of adherence to sources to this project can't be overestimated. Bus stop (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes and that has been followed in this case extremely closely. Off2riorob (talk) 15:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

So once again Bus Stop responds with his usual 'Misplaced Pages must list every Jew I can find a source for' blather. Wrong. Sources are a necessary requirement for inclusion. They are not however a sufficient one. This in an encyclopaedia, not your own personal ethnic database. If you can't come up with a better argument than 'It is sourced, and I want it', then find a Wiki that supports your obsession.

And BTW, Bus Stop, your "reading of sources" clearly falls under WP:OR too. Not to mention that your endless searching for such sources falls under WP:NPOV issues, since it is clearly intended to push an agenda, and distorts the project by marking a particular ethnicity as more worthy of mention. If you were attempting to insert ethnicity into all BLPs, I could take this as merely an obsession, but your confining it to Jewish people demonstrates just how skewed your outlook is over issues of ethnicity, and is further grounds for suggesting you should not be editing BLPs.

With regard to the article in question, I think the statement that "Yanofsky was born and raised in a 'close-knit Jewish family'" is unnecessary, but if the consensus on the talk page is that this should be included, I'll not object. A statement that she is Jewish would at minimum have to clarify whether this was by ethnicity, or faith - and if the latter be self-attributed, and shown to be of relevance to the article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

AndyTheGrump—you say, "…your endless searching for such sources falls under WP:NPOV issues, since it is clearly intended to push an agenda, and distorts the project…"

Let me respond to that:

I didn't first add to the article that Yanofsky was Jewish. Nor did I bring the first of the two sources supporting that Yanofsky is Jewish. Nor did I initiate the section on the Talk page of the Yanofsky article called Talk:Nikki Yanofsky#Religious Views—where the entirety of this discussion takes place at that article. In point of fact the statement that Yanofsky is Jewish has been inserted as well as removed numerous times, by others, before I ever became aware of this issue. When I became aware of the issue I posted my comments and opinions on the already in progress "Religious views" section of the Yanofsky article Talk page. And I also tried to insert the statement that Yanofsky is Jewish into the article. I was reverted. I did nothing for some months, then discovered that there was a new reliable source available that was also supportive of Yanofsky being Jewish. So I brought that to the Talk page and once again tried to insert that assertion into the article. That was about a week ago.

This is an issue that existed for many months at the Yanofsky article long before I even became aware of it. Don't forget that the first of two sources is from February of 2010; I first joined the discussion on the Yanofsky Talk page in December of 2010. I was not even aware of it before that point. If you look through the article history you will see numerous additions of the assertion that Yanofsky is Jewish as well as numerous removals of that same assertion.

I can bring diffs but I thought I'd just present the above as it is easier. Bus stop (talk) 16:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

If I understand this correctly, if we set aside the broader implications and concentrate on the matter at hand (often a good idea) I think I agree with Off2riorob and AndyTheGrump. If we have solid sources as to simple biographical facts, e.g. Nikki Yanofsky was born to Jewish parents, it's fair to include that in the bio absent any particular reason not to. However, we cannot extrapolate our own declaration of identity from that (i.e. say that Nikki Yanofsky is Jewish herself) without sources. You could call that a BLP thing, or SYNTH, or opinion, whatever. The sources on whether she is Jewish herself are few, relatively weak, and subject to reasonable question (e.g. that passing comments in Jewish-related publications that someone is Jewish are often inaccurate and overinclusive). We don't have anything definitive pro or con - no contradicting sources, no self-identification, and no sources to say that any of this matters to her bio, so the default position would be to leave that out. - Wikidemon (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikidemon—you say that, "...passing comments in Jewish-related publications that someone is Jewish are often inaccurate and overinclusive..."

Do you find support for anything along these lines in Misplaced Pages policies, guidelines, essays, or anywhere else on Misplaced Pages? Or is this an idea that has never received any degree of community approval? Bus stop (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not rule-based, it's consensus-based. In this case, the consensus is clearly against you. The applicable policies in this particular case are WP:CON combined with WP:BLP. Yworo (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Yworo—it might be worth noting that nothing supports the notion that a so-called "Jewish source" is any less reliable than a so-called "non-Jewish source". If your argument hinges on such an assumption, might not your argument be invalid? Bus stop (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

To quote WP:NEWSORG, "Whether a specific news story is reliable for a specific fact or statement in a Misplaced Pages article is something that must be assessed on a case by case basis." That's what's being done here. Yworo (talk) 16:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Yworo—when you have two different publications supporting an assertion, that too counts for something. And they are publishing the same information approximately a year apart. These are factors that I think contribute to credibility. Bus stop (talk) 16:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm aware of your opinion. I disagree with you. So do multiple other editors. Things are done by consensus here and the consensus is clearly and solidly against you. You have been repeatedly tendentious on this subject, and if you plan to continue further Wikilawyering on this subject, I personally hope someone starts another topic ban proceeding against you. Yworo (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

• Simple question; does this person self-identify as Jewish? Tarc (talk) 15:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

No, we have nothing presented for that, but she has not been/is not inserted in any cats in regard to that. Off2riorob (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

IMO that is a pretty lear case against Bus Stop's position, then. Tarc (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Alena Gerber

Alena Gerber (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• - Alena Gerber - self-published/relatively unknown

There have been major issues with Ms Gerber's German Misplaced Pages article. The entry here has seemingly been created to repeat claims that have already been proven false and have, as a consequence, been deleted by the German Misplaced Pages community.

This article is being used as an advertising platform for a still rather unknown model and aspiring TV host - something that Misplaced Pages clearly disapproves of, for a reason. Ms Gerber is not widely known in her country of origin, Germany, in either of these roles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabiaflora (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

• - Such issues are pretty much outside the remit of this noticeboard -

• This noticeboard is for reporting and discussing issues with biographies of living persons. These may include editing disputes and cases where contributors are repeatedly adding troublesome material over an extended period.
• It is not for simple vandalism or material which can easily be removed without argument. If you can, simply remove the offending material.
• For general content disputes regarding biographical articles consider using Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies.
• All Misplaced Pages editors are encouraged to assist fellow editors regarding the reports below. Administrators taking actions they consider to be "special enforcement" may wish to note this in the enforcement log.

You should WP:BEBOLD and either edit the article to improve it or WP:PROD it or WP:AFD it. Off2riorob (talk) 19:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Sarah Carey

Sarah Carey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Sarah Carey is best known in Ireland for her role in the Esat Digifone mobile phone licence scandal. Any attempt to make this known is deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emerald ire (talk • contribs) 18:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Please don't WikiLink to Corruption in Ireland in someone's name. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

If that is what she is best known for then she is not notable and the BLP should be deleted - she is of total minor note - wikipedia isn't about millions of articles about people of trivial note that you can find three citations with a mention of them in - not at all. Such is the weakness of the project. Esat Mobile Phone Licence Scandal is at AFD and Carey is not mentioned and she is not even mentioned in the Moriarty Tribunal article. Off2riorob (talk) 19:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Esat Mobile Phone Licence Scandal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

bobby gonzalez

Bobby Gonzalez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I Wednesday, April 6, 2011FROM A DAILY DOSE OF HOOPS http://jadendaly.blogspot.com/

GOOD READ FROM SOMEONE FAIR. have added numerous links on my talk page so that this biography can be properly edited. Here is another one as you asked for: I also have another bio coming from SHU.Lindag3333 (talk) 20:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm putting together some references about this article at User:Demiurge1000/Bobby Gonzalez sources, with a view to addressing the perceived problems of balance and neutrality in the article. I've copied that URL there, but, with this comment: "Unfortunately, as a blog, this is unlikely to be suitable as a source, unless we can put together some verifiable information about its owner". Let me know about the info from SHU when it arrives. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

tyler blackburn

Tyler Blackburn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

he doesnt look like that and he's NOT dead — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgayatri3 (talk • contribs) 00:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know. Someone vandalised the article, I have reverted their changes. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Kaci Brown

Kaci Brown (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

There is another person under the same name as Kaci, Kaci Battaglia, they are the same person and both articles need to be merged — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpking88 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll take a look. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The Brown bio says she was born in July 1988, in Sulphur Springs, Texas. The Battaglia article says that she was born in October 1987 in Clearwater, Florida. From the two bio's they don't seem to be the same person, though looking at images I found on Google, they could perhaps be. I dunno though. I think someone else had better take a look. Or do you have a source that actually states that they are the same person? AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:27, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

They are different people as far as I can see, their lives seem totally different - in some pics they look a bit similar but imo and without anything wiki reliable to support the claim they are two totally different people. I boldly redirected Kaci Brown to her 2005 album as the BLP was long term uncited and low notability, feel free to revert and improve, and tweaked and tidied the externals/dead links on the other. Off2riorob (talk) 11:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

• - - Kacy brown interview 2005

• - Kacy Battaglia interview 2009

Doug Collins

Doug Collins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Doug Collins (basketball) did not lead the Pistons to the 1996 Eastern Conference finals. That year it was the Orlando Magic and the Chicago Bulls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.122.208 (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this says you are correct 1996 NBA Playoffs I removed it as a false claim - I left you a menu of helpful links on your talkpage, if you see an error in an article and you have a WP:RS to support the alteration please WP:BEBOLD and edit the article. Off2riorob (talk) 11:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Mister Cee

Mister Cee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I protected the article to prevent some additions of this kind of material that wasn't properly cited, but I am not sure whether these two are RS or not. --Dweller (talk) 13:32, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh noes..its reported as allegedly due back in court in june... Off2riorob (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

• http://manhattan.ny1.com/content/top_stories/136864/hot-97-dj-arrested-on-lewd-behavior-charge?ap=1&MP4
• http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/public-indecency/hot-97-mister-cee-075392

Rizwan Ali

Rizwan Ali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

relkiable referecnces have been added — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mubee786 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

India (pornographic actress)

India (pornographic actress) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
This page and this page associate, without references, a supposed "real name" with an African-American pornographic performer who also has a career as a singer. I can find no reliable sources associating the two names; worse, there is another African-American singer of the same name , bearing little resemblance to the pornographic actress. The non-porn-associated singer got some publicity associated with American Idol . It looks to me like some level of suppression might be needed, but this information has been on-wiki for so long, (and has by now, unfortunately been widely mirrored and recirculated), that I'd like to get some input before proceeding, just in case there's sourcing I've missed. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:33, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Go for it, remove it and oversight. That India (pornographic actress) blp article is pure porn industry promotion, she is not independently notable - Personally I think that AVN should be blacklisted as spam. Off2riorob (talk) 16:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Ron Torossian

Ronn Torossian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Large number of positive edits by unlikely (otherwise legitimate) editor in an article frequently having issues with both promotion and libel. Torossian is involved in PR. To me it seems like COI edits by proxy. For details, please see the article talk page. I've written more there. --Atavi (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes it becomes necessary for an uninvolved editor to step in and tweak an article up without the history of involvement with the subject - I can't see anything wrong with Dweller's contributions there, they all look beneficial to me. Off2riorob (talk) 15:56, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Fraud and Front Companies

Some enterprising editors have been beefing up our coverage of corporate fraud. The articles on Pearlasia Gamboa, United Assurance Company Ltd., and Allied Artists International are overflowing with claims and counterclaims, court documents and primary sources from Federal Databases. I'm working on it, and it's not out of control, but a few eyes might be helpful, particularly people used to working with Corporations and Crime, allegedly. Ocaasi 03:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Bob Parsons

Bob Parsons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Parsons, who is CEO of GoDaddy.com, was recently in the national news for videotaping himself killing elephants and a leopard in Zimbabwe. PETA and the Humane Society called for a boycott of GoDaddy. Some editors of Parson's page have repeatedly reverted any attempt to mention this event, while refusing to offer their own compromise wording. Editor/administrator input is requested to decided whether the event should be mentioned, whether it should be part of another section or its own section, and how the wording will be determined. Thanks!Brmull (talk) 09:21, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I made a comment on the talkpage. Off2riorob (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages dispute resolution
• Misplaced Pages BLP policy