Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the biographies of living persons noticeboard
This page is for reporting issues regarding biographies of living persons. Generally this means cases where editors are repeatedly adding defamatory or libelous material to articles about living people over an extended period.
  • This page is not for simple vandalism or material which can easily be removed without argument. If you can, simply remove the offending material.
  • Familiarize yourself with the biographies of living persons policy before reporting issues here.
  • You can request a revision deletion on IRC using #wikipedia-en-revdel connect, where only administrators will be able to see your concerns.
  • Important: Do not copy and paste any defamatory or libelous information to this noticeboard. Link to a diff showing the dispute, but do not paste the information here.
Sections older than 5 days archived by ClueBot III.
Click here to purge this page
(For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)

Search this noticeboard & archives

Additional notes:

To start a new request, enter the name of the relevant article below:


Centralized discussion

Amy Goodman[edit]

Amy Goodman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

An IP user and Quinn2425 (talk · contribs) have been adding information about Amy Goodman's salary.[1][2][3] The information is exclusively supported by a primary source, i.e. a form to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). I have reverted the edit twice already[4][5], and have started a discussion on the talk page Talk:Amy_Goodman#Salary, laying down my concerns. Could somebody weigh in on the issue? Thanks. --Edcolins (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Primary sources are exceedingly rarely usable in any BLP. If a secondary source mentions the same fact, use the secondary source. Collect (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Collect. --Edcolins (talk) 20:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Clay J. Cockerell[edit]

I have this article on my watchlist. There is/was a scandal involving this person which has been reported widely and was the subject of multiple "special reports" and newspaper articles. There is a ref to the 60 Minutes episode but there ARE more available. In fact, the reason that I looked at the article in the first place was due to watching a repeat of a tv report about the incident with this Dr's business. I thought that our article was a very fair BLP, but now today the "negative" info. has been deleted twice and refs rm three times so far by two different SPA editors including the one who created the article. Would appreciate opinions, advice here-thanksTeeVeeed (talk) 16:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC) editTeeVeeed (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Was there any ongoing coverage? All I am seeing is news items at the time indicating it was being investigated, but nothing to indicate an outcome or any further/ongoing coverage. Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Can't find any updates since August, yet repeats continue to air on TV about the scandal. To be fair, the DR did say that he himself was a victim of scammers himself,(our article reflects that and I thought it was very fair especially considering that other readers will be drawn to the article to find more info. and updates to the scandal)-- and it is possible that he could be innocent, although his company is featured prominently in all coverage of the story.TeeVeeed (talk) 16:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Alleged but not convicted[edit]

Per WP:BLPCRIME, should Larry Nassar exist? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Jeez, I don't think so. Isn't WP:SINGLEEVENT in play here also? WP:NOTNEWSPAPER kind of comes to mind. I removed a sentence from the lede that was just piling on. But I mean WP:BLP... I get that the guy is in bad trouble; I don't see why absent a conviction we need to put this guy's troubles into the world'd greatest encyclopedia for future generations to know about and ponder over. What if he's acquitted or charges are dropped? Are we going to keep the article, and just add a "Never mind!" section at the end? If not, then why do we have the article now.
I dunno. I think winning a deletion debate would be awful hard. It was in the news a lot, and I think a lot of voters are going to focus on that. You're welcome to try. You've maybe got my vote. Herostratus (talk) 03:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
A splendid case where Wikipedia shows why it ought not be a newspaper. More to the point, any jury pool could be contaminated by anyone reading such an article. Wikipedia does not have a newspaper deadline to meet, and this is a case where delay would do no harm. Collect (talk) 15:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
    • And even if he was convicted, BLPCRIME and BLP1E would say we wouldn't have an article about him. There's no clear indication of notable outside of this trial. --MASEM (t) 15:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Probably could/should be WP:G10-ed. Definitely a violation of WP:BLPCRIME, and seems like an WP:ATTACKPAGE to me. I'd say get rid of it as fast as possible, before WP gets hit with a lawsuit. Softlavender (talk) 15:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Agreed. Without question: delete. Maineartists (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
delete I think that after/if he's convicted there should be an article because he's fairly notable in the gymnastics community, but so far, he's only been charged. This is premature. Natureium (talk) 15:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
  • It's not a candidate for G10 -- it's entirely objective in tone, impeccably sourced, etc. It might not survive an AfD (on grounds of BLP1E), but that's the right process for considering deletion. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
This is an article on WP? a "Timeline" of events directly taken from a newspaper? I think we can do better than this. Maineartists (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Now at AFD, please weigh in there. Fyddlestix (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Floriana Lima[edit]

Records accepted by a wiki admin show Ms. Lima was born in 1981 but there is some confusion based on an unverfied source stating on IMDb that she was born in 1983. Can wikipedia find the correct date and permanently fix it so people stop changing it back and forth leading to confusion? Movieeditor546 (talk) 00:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I looked into it. I concluded that we don't have a good enough source to be confident of any birthdate sufficient for a WP:BLP, so a just removed mention of birthdate from the article; there's more blather from me on the article talk page. Herostratus (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Marcia Bernicat[edit]

Marcia Bernicat

Hi, I have been reasearching Ambassdor Bernicat and noticed that her wikipedia article has the incorrect birth year. According to the Department of State, she was born in 1953. [6]

Your prompt help is very much appreciated. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.253.194.1 (talk) 09:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

There does seem to be some online discrepancies regarding her birthdate. Most Wiki-related sites, of course, are showing 1957 simply because it's in the system. However, articles such as this: [7] reflect the 1957 date. However, their sources were/are State.gov and All.gov as well. Not sure who to side with here. Regardless, the article now states 2 conflicting dates of birth 1) 1957 in the lede and infobox -- and -- 2) in Early Life and Education. You could try raising the issue on the talk page with gathered reliable resources for consensus; and in the interim simply placed 1953?/1957? in lieu of one date until the matter is resolved. Maineartists (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Bruce A. Hedman[edit]

Bruce A. Hedman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This article violates the Autobiography policy in that the subject wrote it himself (bahedman@earthlink.net).

Also, there are apparent citations in the article, but nothing in the References section of the article. Clicking on one of the superscript numbers in the text ([8]) took me to a page outside of Wikipedia that required that I sign in to go any further. I didn't try any of the others: there should be a list of references, if the article remains at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B118:128A:58B0:27DF:E164:D8D6 (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Did some basic cleanup and warned the user about COI and username policies. Would be interested to hear if others think he is notable or not, I think his scholarly publications are the only thing that might make him notable but personally I'm skeptical the article would survive an AFD. Fyddlestix (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm going to err on the side of [WP:AGF] (considering the subject) and say that he simply did not know that Wikipedia was not a resume site. However, the real head-scratcher in all this is that actual WP editors have tried to assist in this article. There is nothing notable about this subject to warrant its inclusion. This needs to be put up for an AfD; sorry to say -- poor fella. He has a very friendly smile. Maineartists (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Trudy Harrison[edit]

Birth date incorrect - Trudy Harrison is not 17!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.190.163.40 (talk) 07:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Fixed. A simple fix, fixable by anyone or addressed on the article talk page, no need to come here. Herostratus (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Richard Gutjahr[edit]

I have made a few changes to the grammar and style of this article, which looked like a machine translation from the German version. What I find odd is the expression "creator of mainstream media" in the head entry. "Mainstream Media" is an ill-defined term, which has been used polemically on occasion. In the German original of this article, no such term is used; RG is called a German media host, journalist and blogger" However, I seem to be unable to edit this head entry at all. What can be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:1A1:4620:7D74:EA57:5F94:34AB (talk) 10:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Cahir O'Doherty (musician)[edit]

Cahir O'Doherty (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The article claims that its subject is "the heir to the Earldom of Huntingdon". No reference or source is provided. Another article on Wikipedia entitled "Earl of Huntingdon" gives the heir as "the Hon. Simon Aubrey Robin Hood Hastings-Bass". Should the assertion in relation to "Cahir O'Doherty" be removed in the absence of and supporting evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenryJoy (talkcontribs) 11:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

HenryJoy This article has suffered from numerous recent vandalisms. [8]Be Bold and revert whatever you feel is not reliably sourced content. (It would seem the entire Early life is vandalism. Maineartists (talk) 13:08, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Fourth/Fifth opinions requested at Talk:Sebastian Gorka[edit]

This person I guess recently got a high profile job in the Trump administration and there is a discussion about whether the current sources are sufficient to basically call him antisemitic. Additional input would be greatly appreciated. TimothyJosephWood 20:25, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

I removed some "material" about being a plagarizer, since it wasn't really covered that well. --Malerooster (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Gheorghe Hagi[edit]

Not from an ethnic Macedonian family (as stated) but romanian from thessaloniki, greece — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.177.66.202 (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Irene Taylor Brodsky[edit]

Unverified source information has been included in Irene Taylor Brodsky's page as well as the page of her film Beware the Slenderman, regarding her and HBO's supposed unauthorized usage of copyrighted material in the Beware the Slenderman film. No sources seem to exist that back up this information beyond possible first-hand research.

["Beware The Slenderman" uses footage from other filmmakers without their permission while she and HBO continue to refuse to credit the original creators.]

Dan Markel[edit]

It's been suggested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendi Adelson that the content of Dan Markel is not fully in accordance with our BLP policy. That's not an area where I have any great expertise or experience, but it does seem to me that, for example, the content added with this edit is negative in tone, about living people, and based on speculation or suspicion rather than solid fact. I've started a talk-page discussion, and am posting here for wider input. Note: much of the content was later copied to Wendi Adelson and Charles Adelson, both of which are now at AfD. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)