Jump to content

Talk:Meek Mill

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2601:285:200:3ac:a191:dd97:8be4:6d2a (talk) at 04:04, 24 May 2018 (→‎Edit Request 5-21-2018). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ace King (article contribs).

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2018

The last paragraph under legal issues states "An FBI investigation was launched into the conduct of the judge presiding over his case." The citation for this statement links to a page that appears to report entertainment news and claims only that an anonymous source indicated that there was an FBI investigation. The FBI apparently issued the standard Glomar response and did not confirm this at all. The anonymous source could have been an interested party. The strongest possible statement supported by the citation is that "There have been reports of FBI investigation into the conduct of the judge presiding over his case." Even that feels like its inclusion in the official wikipedia article gives it a little more authority than it deserves, but at least it's accurate and true. 2601:C1:C001:F6D4:E130:2727:F7A4:1C79 (talk) 06:48, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done: I have rewritten the sentence to address your concern. Thank you for identifying this issue. LifeofTau 09:57, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added another citation where the defense team brings it up in a court filing. The report is by an NPR affiliate. MartinezMD (talk) 12:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2018

The photo should be changed to reflect a clear image of Mr. Williams - he is currently in the background of this low-quality photo.


http://press.atlanticrecords.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Meek-Mill-Main-Pub-2-Photo-Credit_20K-hi-res.jpg This photo is available as a press-released free use resource on press.atlanticrecords.com.

 Done: I've made this change myself after confirmation.

Dmezh (talk) 22:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Civil suit v. criminal proceedings

I found the last few paragraphs initially confusing as it read, once it started saying the FBI was investigating the "judge in his case", which, until you read further, could have been any of the proceedings mentioned earlier in the text (on Wikipedia, it is not a given that the paragraph was actually referring to the one preceeding it, as inexperienced editors and IPs sometimes just insert text without regard to coherence). In any case, for a BLP with this much legal content, just makes sense to divide/distinguish civil and criminal cases. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The FBI investigation was for the judge in his parole violation case, so I moved that into the criminal section. MartinezMD (talk) 18:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request 5-21-2018

The way the Legal Issues section begins is very confusing as it starts by saying he was put on probation and then jumps ahead in his legal troubles to being arrested 4 times for parole violations. Parole is a legal status that is only used for people leaving prison, he cannot go from being on probation to being on parole. The legal issues section would be improved if it followed a sequential order to how the legal events actually occured instead of skipping around pell mell. Please change the article so that it covers his conviction, then his parole, then his arrests for violation of parole as this would be the logical order to talk about those things. I would say how to do this specifically as the template mentions but it will require quite a significant amount of editing and think it would be better left to the discretion of whomever decides to undertake the edit request. It makes no sense to introduce that section of the article by stating he was put on probation when 18 and then subsequently arrested for parole vioations without first explaining how he wound up on parole in the first place.

Darkbenrg (talk) 05:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mill was arrested for illegally possessing a firearm and assaulting a policeman when he was 18 years old. He was put on probation. Since then, he has been arrested four times for parole violation.[4][6]

Eliminate the second sentence from the statement above and replace it with the following section.

In 2008, Mill was convicted of drug dealing and gun possession and was sentenced to 11 to 23 months in prison by Judge Genece Brinkley[47]. After Mill's 2008 conviction, Brinkley would continue to handle Mill's further legal cases. Mill was released during the early portion of 2009 under a five-year parole agreement.[4][48][49][50] In December 2012, Mill was found to have violated his probation and the judge revoked Mill's travel permit.[51]