Jump to content

Talk:Aidan Kearney (journalist)

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

This needs to be included in the summary

[edit]

He is currently charged with 16 counts of witness intimidation, each of which carries a sentence of up to 20 years, along with charges of unlawful picketing to influence a witness and conspiracy to influence a witness.


This is verified by several different sources, including boston 25 news, which Wikipedia does indentify as a reliable third-party source. https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/mass-blogger-known-turtleboy-shares-message-jail-days-after-judge-revoked-his-bail/GIQNUFLVYFGGVM76ANYNIKYADM/ TequilaMockingBird91 (talk) 21:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A current news item isn’t necessarily suitable for a biography. If the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ witness protection legislation is ruled unconstitutional due to the charges against Aidan, that would be suitable for a biography. Gortaleen (talk) 10:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether it’s suitable for a biography is gratuitous. All that’s regarded for a qualified Wikipedia edit is that the edit has to be backed up by a reliable third-party source. TequilaMockingBird91 (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“All that’s required” is too low a threshold for determining what goes into a biography. Current news items that are not of historical significance do not belong in a biography. Gortaleen (talk) 08:44, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to the rules of Wikipedia, all that’s needed is a reliable third-party source. What sources do you have to show that current news items are not of historical significance? People are saying that his arrest are going to be a “major chapter” in Kearny’s upcoming book. I’d say that that’s a major historical significance. TequilaMockingBird91 (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My lord, what an edit war. We have noticeboards for a reason, not so that two editors can edit war for literally months! @TequilaMockingBird91 You're blocked from editing any articles for a week for a failure to understand WP:BLP and edit warring. Contentious material, and criminal accusations are, stay out in the absence of a consensus. @Gortaleen, you escape that sanction purely because of that, but your behaviour was suboptimal. You should have taken this to WP:BLPN long ago. Discuss this. Figure it out. Do NOT resume edit warring or there will be more blocks. Courcelles (talk) 18:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I was unaware of WP:BLP. I will refer future inappropriate changes to the article there. Gortaleen (talk) 20:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Wikipedia is about the the truth. What you're doing is taking money to create and protect a "fake good" page for man who harasses people and has been sued for defamation many times over. Even a political figure sued him and he settled with her just about a month or two ago. I'm disgusted at your stance. I'll be contacting Wikipedia directl 74.193.18.116 (talk) 20:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I saw your reddit post, which also used the phrase "fake good". Wikipedia editors aren’t paid by article subjects—if you make a constructive edit anywhere on this project, you’ll be an editor yourself. You’ll notice, then, that nobody's paid you 😉
Check out WP:BLP to understand more about how biographies like this one are written. Perhaps there’s a case to include these criminal charges. If you think there is, please make that argument based on the policy at WP:BLP. Zanahary 05:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]