This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pink Floyd on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pink FloydWikipedia:WikiProject Pink FloydTemplate:WikiProject Pink FloydPink Floyd articles
Re-size large images around to 300 pixels (all "fair use" images), other than album covers (already done).
Articles
Expand all articles to at least Start class. Some song stubs can't be expanded and should be redirected to the relevant album article. Use the "Interstellar Overdrive" article as an example when editing a song stub.
Expand all of the Floyd's studio album articles to at least GA status.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.
Errors?
The article says that Waters was inducted (with Pink Floyd) into the U.S. and UK Rock and Roll Halls of Fame in 1996. If my (admittedly feeble) memory serves me correctly, Pink Floyd was enshrined in the UK Hall of Fame much later; 2005 or 2006? Also, it says that The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking deals with his failed marriage to Judy Trim. I've always thought that those songs dealt with Carolyne Christie. This is evidenced by the time-period of the recording, the fictionalized versions of Harry and India who appear in the songs (while Waters and Trim had no children together), and the liner-notes of the album, which say: "For Carolyne". Joefromrandb (talk) 05:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice catches, Joe. The UK induction was in 2005 and the cited source does not mention Trim or Christie. GabeMc(talk|contribs) 16:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BLP vio
The change I made to the article corrected a grossly out of date section. Its reversion is a serious BLP vio. I hope it's obvious why, but I can explain further if need be. No further reversions to the old version can be made--this is as close to an absolute as WP policy gets. IronDuke 02:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no. You're introducing inflammatory, negative partisan allegations about a living person into that living person's biography. It is blindingly obvious that you would be the one potentially violating BLP here. You need to discuss your proposed changes on the talk page. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would help if you would read the source material before reverting. I’ll recap for those who don’t wish to bother: Mr. Waters, in July of 2013, employed a pig balloon with a Star of David painted on it. This was viewed as controversial. The ADL at that time appeared uncomfortable with Mr. Waters’ actions, but did not condemn them. After Waters' subsequent letter re divestment, the ADL issued an extraordinarily strong condemnation of Mr. Waters’ views. To leave the page as it was grossly misstates the current—I’ll repeat that: the current—position of the ADL—unless you have something yet fresher, in which case please do post it.
I could see how it might be fairly said that this section is a bit long, but then again, this is an issue that Mr. Waters feels very strongly about and has advocated for. That said, even if this section were pared down to the very bone, two things would remain—the ADL’s (the premiere organization on issues of anti-Semitism in the world) current views on Mr. Waters’ beliefs, as well as, of course, Mr. Waters’ own.
I’ll also add that reversion in cases of gross BLP violations are not subject to 3rr. I should absolutely revert this on sight, but as a gesture of good faith, I’ll invite you to either do so yourself, or say why outdated (and highly slanted) information should remain. IronDuke 03:12, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The ADL is not a living person. Their later position may be relevant to the article, but that is a subject for talk page discussion. The ADL's views are controlling of nothing — they are likely a significant viewpoint, but hardly the only valid viewpoint.
The only thing here that could possibly be a BLP violation is inserting negative material into a biography, which you are unquestionably doing. Your reversions are not in any way protected by BLP.
Removal of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced contentious material that violates the policy on biographies of living persons (BLP). What counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial. Consider reporting to the BLP noticeboard instead of relying on this exemption.
You are *adding* contentious and potentially-biased material to an article about a living person, not removing it. The exemption cannot be said to apply in any way to your actions if you initiate a revert-war on this matter.
Editors are obliged to treat materially neutrally and perhaps solely quoting what Abraham Foxman has said about Waters isn't neutral. ← ZScarpia 11:10, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The ADL is a top quality source. Indeed, your reversions restore part of that source. Your exemptions to BLP do not apply -- at all. And it isn't a BLP vio for the ADL (though come to think of it, it actually is a bit, since this is a highly misleading construance of their views,) but of Waters' position vis-à-vis the premeiere watchdog organization on these matters. Yes, the information is negative ,but that's bound to happen with a contentious subject. If you have any substantive reason this does not belong, and that older, out of date information is preferable (and it being more positive does not, of course, in any way make it more preferable), please let me know. Otherwise this has to be restored, post-haste. IronDuke 12:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
