Jump to content

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 165.225.32.76 (talk) at 19:08, 13 April 2017 (→‎Matthew Dear: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    Welcome – report issues regarding biographies of living persons here.
    Shortcuts

    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.

    Search this noticeboard & archives
    Sections older than 7 days are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

    Additional notes:

    Timmy Tan might be poorly sourced, because I cannot find that much information about him.

    In this page link- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Timmy_Tan, there seems to be gibberish information that seems to be poorly sourced, update: I removed the poorly sourced information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by PattyDay (talk • contribs)

    Terry Bean

    Due to a particularly persistant IP and other editors in the past, this article is under a sustained attempt to exaggerate/over emphasise past legal issues. Some editors want to skew the article to imply the subjects criminal guilt (when charges were dropped due to the alleged 'victim' refusing to testify). The current focus being to shoehorn in reference to a $250,000 'payoff', that from reading the sources (news organisations engaging in tabloid journalism for the most part) was rejected (in order to settle the case - the 'victim' refused to testify anyway). Essentially even if we did include mention of the proposed settlement, we would also have to include all the details about it, vastly inflating what is otherwise a minor issue in someones biography. More eyes appreciated. This has also been to ANI where the IP has been told to drop the stick, however stick still seems to be firmly grasped. Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:15, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Per reliable reporting, "In addition to the $225,000, Bean agreed to never contact the boy and to undergo testing for sexually transmitted diseases at a clinic chosen by the boy's attorney, Lori Deveny, and provide the results to Deveny." The judge rejected Bean's settlement offer,[1] and after the alleged victim declined to testify, the judge dismissed the case but refused Bean's request that future prosecution be barred.[2]. In view of these simple facts, it seems odd to completely exclude them from the BLP, especially given that the BLP includes an extensive quote from Bean about how exonerated he feels.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:55, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Btw, the IP was blocked for a week. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Frysay/Archive for further info. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Welfare State ‖ 23:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Good to know. I think we're agreed that this is a satisfactory outcome.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Kendra Haste

    Could someone have a look at the use of reference (3) on this page - it seems to me like giant overkill but it's a consequence of a recent edit war, in which I was a protagonist. Please fix - will be sincerely grateful. MarkDask 00:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I do not see how using that source violates BLP policy in any way, markdask. Can you please clarify? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the swift reply Cullen - btw I was the one supplied the ref initially. . Ironically it was the 20 uses of this ref (3) brought the war to an end. It was applied by an admin who separated me and A.N. Other who had been warring. I came here seeking an independent perspective as to whether or not the ref needed to be applied in every instance. Such use seems excessive to me - detracts from readability - how many articles have 20 uses of the same ref? I aint trying to prolong the war - that's over - I simply want to cleanup the page. Thanks again. MarkDask 01:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no idea how using a named reference 20 times is any sort of problem at all, assuming that the reference is comprehensive and reliable. I brought Harry Yount to Good article status, and used one reference 23 times. Granted, that is not a BLP but I see no BLP issues with using a reference 20 times. What is the readability issue? Letters of the alphabet? That is routine and standard. I fail to see any problem with it, markdask. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:05, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Cullen - I'll leave it as is . MarkDask 13:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Everyone thinks they're the protagonist in an edit war. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Neither article being discussed here relies only on a single source to establish notability, Only in death. Both have multiple sources that establish notability quite clearly. In the case of Kendra Haste, there are 24 references in the article. Each of these articles, though, uses one comprehensive source twenty or more times, because those sources are lengthy and detailed enough to verify many specific assertions in these articles. I repeat that I see nothing at all wrong with this. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Andy McGuire

    This article seems like it is a poorly sourced article from a non neutral POV. It is exceedingly long for the notability of the subject and lists things that seem to not add much to the article like all of her awards and boards she serves on. Ximthebest (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    It does, but BLPN is primarily intended to prevent damaging material being added to BLPs. No-one is going to sue for libel over a hagiography. If I were you I'd just go ahead and remove it. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I was actually shocked when it was approved to be moved; given the sources and resume style content. Maybe a seasoned editor such as Eagleash, who has actually edited the article, could shed light as to how this could remain as such. I trust his judgment. (although, I'm shaking my head at this one, honestly). Incredible ... Maineartists (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Ximthebest I just saw that you removed the most blatant parts of the article. I hope you continue and scale back most of the unnecessary content within the other sections, too. Honestly, this subject -- for her general notability -- does not warrant the inclusion of all this information (which itself is not notable). The lede alone is excessive. Maineartists (talk) 19:20, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Maineartists: No, I can't shed any light. I seem to have just done some very minor tidying (adding a boldname, rm'g stray text and unforcing an image) immediately after it was moved by another editor. It's not an area where I habitually edit (usually pre-70s motorsport or Crystal Palace F.C.) so I've no idea how I even came by it. Eagleash (talk) 20:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Jesse Taylor

    The first entry on this page refers to Season 25 of The Ultimate Fighter and lists the two fighters who will fight in the finale of the show. Season 25 doesn't premiere until April 19, 2017, so the information listed on Taylor's page is either inaccurate or is revealing the results of a season that has not aired yet.


    link to site

    Jodi DiPiazza

    The advocates for Ms. DiPiazza are tireless--every time she preforms or is slated to perform somewhere, a WP:COI account adds the news to the bio, even if it's sourced to a slim mention from a press release. This probably doesn't constitute a need for page protection, but it does require constant oversight from unaffiliated editors. Assistance and/or suggestions welcome, but mostly I'm asking for more eyes, more watchlisting. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Oscar Munoz (executive)

    Munoz is the President and CEO of United Airlines. Following an incident today where a passenger was forcibly removed from an aircraft, Munoz commented by describing the incident as the result of "re-accommodation" of passengers. Editors have been reacting negatively to this comment on his Wikipedia article. I have reverted edits, per WP:IMPARTIAL, WP:SCAREQUOTES, and WP:NOTNEWS. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm finding it hard to follow your logic. WP:SCAREQUOTES deprecates use of quotation marks when not marking an actual quote; here, the quote marks were used for an actual quote. Likewise WP:IMPARTIAL isn't a blanket prohibition of information that might be considered less than favorable. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    The claims by Magnolia677 that “Editors have been reacting negatively to this comment on his Wikipedia article…” are hyperbolic and needlessly alarmist. The tone seems to be that somehow Wiki-editors are engaged in some cover-up. When the reality is the rabid foaming at the mouth of the edits in question is the reason the edits are being removed; not because anyone is trying to cover-up anything. Place rational, encyclopedic content on the page—with citations—and the edits stand. Simple as that. That said, I have gone ahead and created a “Controversy” section that attempts to convey the facts in an encyclopedic tone without engaging in the bizarre alarmist nonsense a few other editors are attempting to force in place. This incident was horrible and horrific and the reactions of United’s CEO are a bit tone deaf, but let’s stick to the facts here. --SpyMagician (talk) 13:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I have made a slight rewrite to the section, and changed the section title, per WP:CRIT. This is indeed a valid addition to this person's article. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    The addition of the incident is valid. The tone you—and other editors—are engaged in is not valid, not encyclopedic and not neutral. That is all anyone is debating. If you do not understand that, then please just post this information to a gossip blog and not attempt to add it to Wikipedia. --SpyMagician (talk) 14:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    content regard to information about nurcahyo haryo tejo

    As wrote in

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurcahyo_Haryo_Tejo

    from the owner of the information/ the person himself, request of deletion of the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.169.224.61 (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Cyclone Dyonne

    I was researching the article because it is listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyclone Dyonne I amended my "delete" !vote to "Delete now" because it became clear the article title was a made up potentially libelous attack name. Please see my comments as to how I came to this conclusion. Otr500 (talk) 09:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Robert M. Franklin

    Please add this information to update my biography.

    Robert M. Franklin is Senior Advisor to the President of Emory University and the James T. and Berta R. Laney Professor in Moral Leadership at Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Atlanta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.84.229.114 (talk) 13:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Links to site with personal information such as phone number

    A reader contacted Wikimedia (OTRS ticket:2017041110014372 ) concerned that a recently added footnote (purportedly to support the birth date), also included home phone, home address and personal email address. (I am separately checking with the reliable sources noticeboard to see if the source qualifies as reliable.)

    Our BLP policy makes it clear that "articles should not include postal addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, or other contact information for living persons". It goes on to permit some links — "although links to websites maintained by the subject are generally permitted".

    It does not appear to directly address the current situation where the material is not in the article but is in a footnote in a website not maintained by the subject.

    I would have guessed that this issue is so common it must've been addressed but I'm not recalling such a discussion. If it is already been addressed please point me to the discussion; if it is not can we discussed. It is my opinion that we should remove such links.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not sure if this is always possible, but we should avoid such links if the information that is being supported can be obtained in other ways, but sometimes the source is completely valid for inclusion and it happens to include personal details. (For example, if we are talking about a notable court case, a person's contact address is likely to be listed in court documentation that would be valid EL or reference material). Some common sense is needed. The thing that I rarely have seen, in RSes, is the combo of birthdate and current contact info. That's in the realm of databases, not normally RSes. --MASEM (t) 14:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Vibhas Joshi

    Dear Wikipedia I agree with your authencity but you should also see the places I am using in my account. IMdb is the biggest and the most authentic celebrity database of the world and you guys saying is unauthentic .

    My reference in accordance to IMdb.com http://www.imdb.com/name/nm8235213/?ref_=nv_sr_1

    IMdb reference in accordance to wikipedia.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMDb

    KIndly remove these tags which have been applied on my page

    thanks regards Vibhas Joshi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhas Joshi (talk • contribs) 21:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    The subject of the page, you, is not notable and lacks significant coverage in reliable source. Also, you should take a look through WP:COI. Meatsgains (talk) 02:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    raj singh

    respected team wikipedia, can it be done the article which seems to have gone wayword can be ignored or removed by wikipedia?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhas Joshi (talk • contribs) 21:38, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you specify what page you are referring to and why are you requesting for it to be deleted? Meatsgains (talk) 02:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    David Dao

    The page was created in the wake of the United Airlines Flight 3411 incident.

    Since until yesterday Dao was a private individual & did not have an article, I wonder if the creation and the materials can be considered an attack page? 2017 April 11 version. My attempt to edit the articles have been reverted. I wonder if an experienced editor could have a look. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I've reverted the most recent expansion of the past actions per WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE, and started a conversation on the talk page. I'm somewhat open to the discussion the other actions, but also have concerns about it. Comment from other editors on talk is would be helpful in sorting out what should be included pending the AfD outcome. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:31, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Just seen that the original version of this article still exists at User:BlueSalix/sandbox AusLondonder (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    It was replaced with a redirect when the AfD closed today, and good riddance. Pinkbeast (talk) 14:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Daniel Hayes

    Daniel Hayes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    From a 1985 Toronto-born actor[3], he has morphed into a 1989 Trinidad-born boxer[4]. To make matters worse, multiple parts of the current article are copyvios from his homesite. The man is getting younger all the time though, from 32 years old he became 28 years old, but a 2017 press release from his manager and himself state that he is 25 years old[5]. That source claims again that he is Toronto-born though. In 2010 already, he had finished his college studies apparently and had worked as a professional actor for a while, so the 1989 year of birth seems dubious but no actual year is given here[6]. It is included here though!

    Looking at the article and the sources, I get the impression that a lot of myth-making is involved, and that a lot of effort will be needed to make this article verifiable and realistic. He is said to have missed "the 2016 Olympic Games because of a shoulder injury", but his first and only fight as a boxer so far seems to have been in December 2016[7], and I can't find any evidence of him being seriuosly considered as an Olympian boxer. He claims to have been the 2016 Trinidad and Tobago Middleweight boxing champion, but I can't find any evidence for this, and no evidence that he was ever qualified or nearly qualified for the Olympics (see e.g. this. He did appear on a number of podcasts and the like as such, but that of course is no evidence for any of his claims.

    This page should probably be trimmed down to the undisputed facts (not a lot, it seems) and then watched carefully, but more time and knowledge is needed than I can spare for it for the moment. Fram (talk) 09:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    I've now trimmed it down to remove the most obvious problems, but the basic issues remain and it would be good if someone else could take a look and see what is salvagebale and what isn't. Fram (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    AfD with BLP issues

    Please have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleni Antoniadou (2nd nomination); there are BLP issues that in my view should be considered in this AfD. It be deleted or kept but it would be useful to have people used to considering these issues discussing them. Thx! Jytdog (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Richard Hambleton

    Richard Hambleton Hello, My name is Kevin Whipple. I work for Woodward Gallery in NYC. Woodward Gallery represents the artist Richard Hambleton. I am trying to correct his birthday on his wikipedia page. I have documentation to prove his corrected birthday. How do I go about correcting this?

    Thanks, Kevin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwhipple90 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kwhipple90: We generally can't include dates of birth unless they are widely publicised and known about anyway, for privacy reasons. I appreciate Mr Hambleton may be perfectly fine with people knowing his birthday, but we prefer to be consistent across the board, as you can never be entirely sure if somebody is happy with it, or will continue to be so indefinitely. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:53, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    His date of birth is already posted on his Wiki page, however it is incorrect. I am trying to correct it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwhipple90 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kwhipple90: Okay, I have found a source for the correct DOB and added it to the article - can you check it's now correct? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    That is correct! Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwhipple90 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff

    The president of Brazil is a public figure but even after making huge allowances for that and much effort on my part, this page is still really defamatory in my opinion. For what is is worth NPOV agreed. At the time I was trying to convince some editors that you can't call her account of events FRINGE because you don't believe it. Anyway, I came across this article as a truly truly bad machine translation and given an utter lack of willing Portugese speaker I and another editor I recruited have hammered it into something approaching English by dint of asking many many questions of a very patient Portuguese speaker -- however the article is still 90% or more prosecution case and that's after weed-whacking a bunch of weasel words. Someone was very concerned with making sure it is clear that a constitutional process was followed, which I can understand, but ... bottom line I need help, guys.

    Can I please have some eyes on this article? I need to walk away for a bit because I just lost my temper over some new strange application of wikipedia policies. Thanks xoxxo Elinruby (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Matthew Dear

    This biography contains heavily subjective and opinionated items, particularly in "History" paragraph 7: "Matthew Dears latest full-length, 2012’s Beams, was both a drastic departure from and worthy successor to Black City's gothic masterwork. A suite of weird, wild, and queasily optimistic rhythm-driven pop songs, Beams became the latest chapter in the continuing evolution of one of music’s most fascinating minds. After over a decade of exploring pops outer limits, Matthew Dear now inhabits a rarified corner of the musical universe: no longer tethered to any one genre, respected by his peers, and blessed with a bottomless well of creative energy."

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&oldid=775263178"