Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:Understand that these are quite clearly very reliable secondary sources that are spread worldwide in at least a couple of languages. That's all that's required for expanding an article in Misplaced Pages, despite the views of a few administrators.
:Understand that these are quite clearly very reliable secondary sources that are spread worldwide in at least a couple of languages. That's all that's required for expanding an article in Misplaced Pages, despite the views of a few administrators.
] (]) 01:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
] (]) 01:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
::I've explained why it's a BLP violation, CB, and I don't really want to get into the details on this talk page. Suffice to say the circular sourcing was problematic. If you disagree with me, you're welcome to take it to the ]. <font color="blue">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font><font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 01:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
I agree. Maybe it should go in the bio section, with the names of those whose co-authorship earns him the number. On it's own it reads a bit like his shoe size, at least to someone unfamiliar with the term. Kevin (talk) 10:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Please discuss reverts
The incident concerning Hewitt's ban by Misplaced Pages administrators excited worldwide comment, as is easily shown by reliable sources.
To insist that it not be noted in the article seems inexplicable.
Calamity Brook, I've protected the page to prevent a BLP violation. There's consensus (see the archives and history) that this material is inappropriate. The person who drew the media's attention to the situation, and who acted as the source, was also involved in the ArbCom case in opposition to the subject, so it was an unfortunate situation that's best left behind us. The page has been calm recently, and hopefully it will stay that way. SlimVirgin
Consensus has changed as of now.
Your not making a coherent argument.
Deepthroat both drew the media's attention to Watergate and acted as a source. So what??
There are two major news sources quoted from UK and from NZ, and a significant news source from Germany. Undoubtedly there are numerous other reliable sources.
Understand that these are quite clearly very reliable secondary sources that are spread worldwide in at least a couple of languages. That's all that's required for expanding an article in Misplaced Pages, despite the views of a few administrators.
I've explained why it's a BLP violation, CB, and I don't really want to get into the details on this talk page. Suffice to say the circular sourcing was problematic. If you disagree with me, you're welcome to take it to the BLP noticeboard. SlimVirgin01:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
