Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. See the dashboard for an expanded listing.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
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)
Shortcuts:
Search this noticeboard & archives

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


Ariel Fernandez[edit]

From the Talk page on the article Ariel Fernandez of which I am the subject, I became aware of continuous efforts by editor Molevol1234 to include mentioning of questioned papers that I have authored. The questioned papers have not been retracted and no wrongdoing on my behalf has been determined. As I learned from the Talk page, in such a case, according to Wikipedia policy, reputable secondary sources justifying notability for inclusion would need to be included. The blog Retraction Watch does not constitute such a reputable secondary source because it is a self-published blog, as several editors have noted in the archived discussions (BLP:SPS). As I understand, Wikipedia policy forbids SPS for BLPs. Thank you for your attention.Ariel Fernandez Ph D (talk) 23:18, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Of obvious relevance: long SPI archive. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
    • And, of course, WP:BLP then no longer applies to living persons who annoyed an editor? sorry -- that sort of claim is totally uncalled for. Collect (talk) 13:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
      • Oh dear -- yes, indeed, that sort of claim is totally uncalled for!!!!!!!!! Who made that claim?? They should be reported!! Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
@Collect: who said it??? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 22:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
@Collect: this is surely a serious matter and I'm puzzled that you haven't pursued it. Who made that claim? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
@Collect: is it possible that in fact no one made the claim you identified? If so, perhaps you could clarify so that this topic can be archived properly. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 11:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, I think we'll have to conclude that Collect made some sort of error here -- was perhaps confused about something or other. Or perhaps ping wasn't working... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 06:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not a sock. I have a social security number, a driver license and a passport. I have not reported invalid data in any of my 350 papers. There is no notability in mentioning the papers questioned by (Redacted). The papers have not been retracted. Thanks for your kind attention.Ariel Fernandez Ph D (talk) 13:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Collect is of course, correct, you are allowed to protest the content of your article. WP:BLPSPS says: Never use self-published sources – including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets – as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject. You focus on the use of Retraction Watch, a self-published blog. You may notice that RW is never used in the article as the single source for any single fact, there is always another reference. RW is not being used as a 'as source[s] of material about a living person' but as an additional reference with supporting contextual material. Is there a particular statement in the article that you contend is untrue? Are there secondary sources with in depth coverage which we are overlooking? (Non english-language sources are welcome but will take longer for us to deal with). Do you contend that the overall balance of coverage in the article is drastically unrepresentative of the coverage of you in secondary sources? Stuartyeates (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
    • As I understand, a secondary source needs to be cited to justify that the mention of papers merely questioned by a third party has enough notability to be included in the Wikipedia article of a living person. I doubt that there is any reputable secondary source that would justify such a thing. May I remind you these are not papers retracted or papers proven to contain invalid data. The papers have been merely questioned by (Redacted). Also, WP:BLPSPS says "Never use self-published sources ... as sources of material about a living person". Thus, as far as I can tell, it is immaterial whether RW is the only source used or not, RW is a source used, and that is strictly forbidden. Ariel Fernandez Ph D (talk) 01:46, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
I've removed WP:OUTING and indef'ed this latest sock. He's been indef'ed multiple times over the years, has brought nothing new to this discussion here, and has even been warned for outing before. DMacks (talk) 03:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Retraction Watch is self pusblished indiscriminate source, not allowed in BLP as per BLP SPS. There are millions of challenged papers, different from retracted or invalid. That is not important stuff.190.176.243.185 (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Poppy Drayton[edit]

Hi. I'd appreciate some more eyes on Poppy Drayton – various IP's keep adding her birthdate based on a Twitter post which to my mind verifies no such thing. Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I would appreciate it if some people knowledgeable about BLP's and BLP policies would take a look at Talk:Poppy Drayton#Poppy Drayton Birthday – I suspect we're almost to a resolution here, but I'd like some knowledgeable "third opinions" before proceeding... Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Jason Rapert[edit]

See also:

___

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to seek your assistance with a problem that has been ongoing ever since I was elected as a state senator in Arkansas. Someone has been editing the page titled "Jason Rapert" on Wikipedia including false, erroneous and at times libelous information. I have asked repeatedly to have editors remove that information and have seen discussions about the sources being used. Often the postings on Wikipedia happen to coincide with democrat campaign releases. Wikipedia is being coopted by political activists to pretend to post "news" when in fact they are posting accusations they are part of.

After several attempts to get your organization to assist in a responsible manner and hopefully restrict the editorial access to prevent the site from being used as a weapon to defame my character - I have gotten no real help. This was a surprise, which has now become an issue. Since Wikipedia has not removed poorly sourced information from bloggers and the like, I simply decided to post a disclaimer section directing people to access my official biography information on the Arkansas Legislative website, my personal website, ministry website and business website. I was shocked this evening when my first disclaimer was removed and literally removed a second time as you can review in the edit history.

In particular, the Arkansas Times which is well-known in our state for their liberal bias, has been used as a source, or another blog or media outlet writes something using the Arkansas Times as a source, and then you have two articles with truly only one actual source that is not objective. The problem with the Arkansas Times is that it is NOT a news organization - it is a free "giveaway" paper that also uses the internet to spread their material. The editor of the organization is known for extreme bias and far-left viewpoints, and he has declared war on me and will post all sorts of false, erroneous and libelous information directed at me because he disagrees with my positions on public policy.

I had respect for Wikipedia up until I became the subject of a blatant act of defamation that your organization will not correct, will not remove and will not even allow me as the subject of the defamation to have a disclaimer posted on the page directing people to accurate information. This seems very unfair and I would fight hard for a constituent placed in such a horrible position as I am myself experiencing.

I may be deemed a "public figure", but I have a right to have the truth made available. When you allow defamation to be posted and you are aware that it is defamation, you are responsible for not removing it and become an accomplice to the act of defamation in my opinion.

I would like to know the name(s) of someone in the Wikipedia organization who understands the severity of this ongoing situation so that we can get to a resolution. I look forward to hearing back from you.

Respectfully,

Sen. Jason Rapert jason.rapert@senate.ar.gov Sjrapert (talk) 04:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

{{Adminhelp}}

@Sjrapert: I read the article and could not find any major issues with it. What would be helpful is for you to indicate exactly what material there you consider to be inaccurate or poorly sourced, so that we can assess it. - Cwobeel (talk) 15:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, you can see what he was trying to delete. It's clear to me there's no issue with the way we were reporting what is/was in the sources. The problem, then, is the sources, not us... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I did not see anything problematic with neither the text nor the sources. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
The Controversy section, which he originally tried to remove, was sourced to a Arkansas blog site - not an RS. Not sure who, but someone went through and added three new sources. I think the issue here is WP:DUE. Is his controversial tweet significant enough for inclusion? Meatsgains (talk) 18:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes -- as per the three new sources about it... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
It is verifiable but maybe an RfC should be submitted on its inclusion to abide by WP:ONUS Meatsgains (talk) 15:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I am disabling the "Adminhelp" template above, as (1) it is not clear that there is any issue which a Wikipedia administrator can deal with better than any other editor, (2) plenty of administrators check this page anyway, (3) the template has been in place for several days, and any administrator who has not chosen to respond by now probably isn't going to. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:34, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Manitonquat (which is a BLP)[edit]

I am concerned that a number of editors are persistently trying to add contentious and negative information to this article without adequate sourcing.

  • There is a concerted effort to include claims about his race in the article, referenced to self-published sources
  • There have been attempts to source these claims from a site with the word "fraud" prominently in the URL and title. The site does not appear to be a reliable source -certainly not reliable enough for the contentious claims it is being used to source - but my main concern is that the word "fraud" is being casually associated with a BLP by using the link.
  • There is an issue around his name, with reliable sources using "Manitonquat" or "Medicine Story", which also appears to be his preferred way of identifying himself. Some editors would rather remove references to these names and only use his birth name.

I have been involved in the DRV and AfD on this article, as well as trying to improve it and remove what I believe are BLP violations, but I feel I'm getting too involved in this and starting to question my own judgment. I would appreciate it if others would watchlist the page and keep an eye out for BLP issues. I have no personal involvement with the subject and I believe I have remained neutral in my editing. Thparkth (talk) 22:55, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I am troubled by Montana's description of a living person as a plastic shaman, using non reliable sourcing, and reverting in someone's family racial history (his father was white, his grandfather was white etc) - this stinks of inter-ethnic politics. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Just took a closer look at newagefraud.org, that particular section is pretty much an attack site. Not a chance it passes as a RS for contentious material in a BLP. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
There are deep issues here which a number of editors are glossing over: (a) passing (racial identity) is a real thing and means that genealogical records can't be taken at face value (b) many of the sources involved are interview-based sources without critical evaluation, making them primary sources (c) as described in the Ethnic group article, ethnicity is not simply a matter of descent (d) there are all sorts of blogs and message boards making all sorts of accusations and (e) there are sources arguing that group X is a cult (in the negative sense). Stuartyeates (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I was going to say, I would *not* trust a 19th/early 20th century US government census to determine ethnicity. Hell my government thinks my religion is Jedi... Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to all who have posted in this discussion. On 7 Jan I attempted to create a report of Vandalism WP:SVT on this board. Very likely I made some error. I've never created such a report before; nor had previous experience with this level of discussion concerning advanced fine points of Wikipedia policy. FYI, this is the Vandalism report I attempted to post here on Jan 7:

Vandalism to Manitonquat article has been alleged on its Talk page since November 24, 2015;

along with previous entry to the same Talk 6 April 2012 page noting suspiciously inaccurate additions, & advising correction.

As of December 18, the page was corrected by myself. (See screenshot https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_REVISION_Manitonquat.png#globalusage)

Upon presentation of new material, it was subsequently swiftly deleted, without reference thereto. This was also alleged as possible subtle vandalism in the DRV discussion:

See DRV discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_December_29 In this DRV, newly-available material establishes notability. Article was cleared for re-creation.

Re-created article (basically the same as my previous edit of Dec 18 (see screenshot on Commons, link above). Within a day, it had also been subject to an edit which I must allege to be subtle vandalism; whether due to malicious intent, or to such flagrant disregard for accuracy as to be effectively just as bad.

I am in the process of organizing citations included in the DRV, to comply with request for references which is now posted on this article.

However, it seems not in interests of accuracy that an editor (possibly User:CorbieVreccan ..? ) has deleted all references to Manitonquat's recognition as an official tribal elder of the Wampanoag Nation of Massachusetts; which is well-documented in the DRV. The editor also claimed that Manitonquat "lives primarily in Germany". A patently false misrepresentation, without citation, and contradicting widely-available documentaion that he has had the same address in New Hampshire for the last 30 years. The editor likewise re-inserted a link to the article Grey Owl: an Englishman who posed as a Native American spokesman. Documentation cited in the DRV confirms that such subtle efforts to cast aspersions on Manitonquat's integrity are subtle vandalism; which likewise impact the integrity of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia wisely has policy in place regarding topics of a particularly contentious nature: "Troubles-related topics" are an excellent example. That is, topics which concern violent, passionate conflict, with a long history of profound controversy. Where pages are likely to be subject to editing wars, etc.

Native American people/culture have been decimated by centuries of aggressive genocidal warfare of various colors: official and unofficial, military and para-military. Since the cessation of armed warfare between the Indian nations and the US Government, they have suffered incalculable damage from institutionalized racism, undeclared clandestine para-military violence, and a host of other ills connected with their race/cultural identity.

It seems advisable that special expertise, scrutiny, & vigilance could with justice be applied to articles concerning Native Americans.

Manitonquat's work has an added dimension of controversy; in that he is associated with the Rainbow Gathering Rainbow Family and New Age philosophy.

I reiterate for the Administrators' Notice Board my allegation that the Manitonquat page has been subject to on-going subtle vandalism; and request assistance from administrators / Subtle Vandalism Taskforce.

Please note further that the user who received a vandalism warning from me on the same date (7 Jan) and has been criticized for extraordinary conduct in the current AfD2 User:CorbieVreccan has issued what I hold to be a retaliatory & vexatious complaint of COI against me. (Please see my response on my Talk page.)

I also apologize for errors of procedure which I've made in the course of this process, due to inexperience.

As regarding alleged COI in myself, as explained on my Talk page, my acquaintance with Manitonquat's work does not fall within COI criteria. Horse Dancing (talk) 11:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Raymond Hoser[edit]

The entire page is false and libelous. It should be removed. by way of example it refers adversely to court proceedings Mr Hoser won and yet this page reports the opposite. The Wikipedia page in a defamatory comment asserts Hoser "claims" the name "snake man" when in fact he's owned the registered trademarks for the words across the English speaking world, USA, UK and Australia for decades and is known under this name and could only get the trademarks on that basis. You wouldn't assert Microsoft "claims this title", so why do this for Hoser? It is a hate page by Hoser's business competitors and others with an axe to grind and Wikipedia is not the place for businesses to attack one another.

114.77.110.195 - you were advised, correctly so | here that what you were trying to add in was unreferenced. You were also told this here as well on the talk page . You were also told | here as well and | here too and | here as well . The bulk of your edits are on this article. I would suggest you listen to what your being told, and that is, that you need to have a reliable reference for anything you want to put on the article. KoshVorlon 17:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Carl Raschke[edit]

Please evaluate Carl Raschke entries by editor bloodofox who consistently violates WP policy on biographies of living persons. Check talk page. I would like a response.LH Chicago (talk) 05:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)LH_Chicago

user:bloodofox cites an article claiming I accused Asatru of fomenting a biological terrorism attack based on an attribution in an SPLC article from 1998 which is not a quote but a statement. I have denied making that statement. It is part of what is clearly a smear campaign by Bloodofox to cite only negative sources and to disallow anything favorable. Consider how many edits to the page he has already deleted on specious grounds. Many of these edits disallowed cite very credible academic sources.Carlraschke (talk) 05:02, 13 January 2016 (UTC)Carlraschke

Vijay Batra[edit]

We have provided all information in the article but each and every time it shows issues, what can we do to remove all issue,— Preceding unsigned comment added by Amit03tiwari (talk • contribs) 05:18, 13 January 2016

The article lists books written by the BLP, but it does not include any reliable sources independent of the subject with in depth coverage to establish its notability. If the article is not improved by adding some references, it will most likely be deleted. Also, please remember to sign your comments on discussion pages by clicking on the icon: Signature button or by typing --~~~~ at the end of your message. Regards. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Kevin Fitzgerald (American football)[edit]

This article was created without the consent of any of the three aforementioned individuals included within the article. It contains private personal information in forms of name, birth dates, educational history, and other biographical information. Under the article, "Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons [link below]," it states the following under the subtitle "People who are relatively unknown:" "Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources." Under the same guidelines, the sub-topic "Avoid misuse of primary sources, it states, "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses." While the individual Kevin Fitzgerald has no qualms about the mention of his NFL career (as that information is public record), the information regarding his two sons and his birth date are not relevant to the titular individual's notability. Furthermore, that information is not listed in the references posted at the bottom of the article. As such, he requests that the information be removed immediately.

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid misuse of primary sources

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.125.98 (talk • contribs)

The content was added in the most recent edits to the page. Thanks for pointing it out - I have removed it. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
I should note I haven't removed the date of birth - it is referenced, is available on the NFL website, and does not seem to be very secret. Maybe someone else will be sympathetic to removing it. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

adland[edit]

Admin Needed: Request Removal Personally Identifying Information

Previously asked for help on the BLP which has been archived here. Need help and advice again. History; an editor GameOn (talk · contribs) has linked a page both from the talk page of the article, and his own user page, that reveals my home address and national ID. As I explained previously, the sole proprietorship he links was never the company behind Adland, and it's clearly listed as inactive on the page. GameOn uses this link to argue that my title is not CEO, while conveniently ignoring that other registered companies that were involved with Adland lists me as exactly that from the same source. I'm not here to explain the company board layout, ownership and history of the company structure to the Wikipedia, but just request once again that my personal information be removed from the talk and user pages of GameOn and Adland as it's both not relevant, and in light of the foreign death threats and ongoing harassment I receive - as noted on the Adland article itself - a dangerous precedent. Someone removed the links at my last BLP request for help, but editor GameOn has now reinstated these links. GameOn points out that we have a freedom of information in Sweden, which is correct, and argues that I should get my personal ID hidden in Sweden if I am so concerned. This is the equivalent of the US witness protection program, with a huge impact on all dealings with medical, tax, government, schools and all other records in Sweden and not a simple status to get. It would seem far more pragmatic to simply follow Wikipedia directive WP:BLPPRIVACY instead. This is also skirting WP:DWH where private personal information is part of the issue. I won't comment on GameOn's suggestion that it is not my home address, for the very same security concerns I've already pointed out, and I won't comment on ongoing police investigations. I will however note that 20% of GameOn's edits on the English Wikipedia are on the Adland page or related to it, and that he seems to suggest that I am the user who removed the link. For the record I am not BadAndWrong (talk · contribs) and it seems to be WP:ABF to argue s/he might be, I hope I simply misunderstood. Aaskw (talk) 22:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm making the call that this is a problem in regard to WP:BLPPRIMARY, as the link is to a public record that contains personal information. Accordingly I've removed both links. If the consensus is that the link is allowed we can revisit this, but at this stage I'd rather err on the side of caution, especially where potential BLP issues are concerned. - Bilby (talk) 00:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

todd hickman[edit]

Hello, I want to report a libelous statement made to the article about Todd Hickman. The final sentence says that "he was the worst coach to roam the sidelines." This is libel. Someone posted this untrue statement and we want it removed immediately. His record at the University of Minnesota-Morris was not the worst and the statement is very defamatory.

This is unacceptable and needs to be removed.

I expect to hear from you and see it removed.

Thanks!

Karie and Todd Hickman Krwhick (talk) 04:07, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

NatGertler beat me to it. The information has been removed. Meatsgains (talk) 04:16, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
I have redeleted the material (it isn't "libel", as it's a statement of opinion rather than fact, but it doesn't conform to Our guideline on neutral point of view. However, I cannot watch it for a while. Could someone else put some eyes on this? --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
I've watchlsited the page and will keep my eyes on it. Meatsgains (talk) 04:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

todd hickman contd[edit]

Todd Hickman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Thanks for dealing with this immediately. The person that posted this defamatory and libelous statement was the user vexorator on Dec. 3 2015. I request that you block this person from making further libelous statements in the future.

Sincerely,

Todd and Karie Hickman Krwhick (talk) 04:32, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually, it was not Vexorator (talk · contribs), whose edit on the article was inserting the name of the team, with a wikilink to its page. The edit you appear to be concerned about was done by an anonymous editor in September. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Wait a second, what? Haha yeah I most definitely did not make any "defamatory" or "libelous" statements. Thank you Nat Gertler. --Vexorator (Talk) 12:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Willy Bo Richardson[edit]

Willy Bo Richardson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Willy Bo Richardson article lacks inline citation. Links at bottom of article appear to be self-published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpotance (talk • contribs) 04:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

  • The notability here is somewhat in question. The further reading sources are sort of questionable at best and the references all appear to be primary. The PBS appearance is usable as a RS, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:52, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
  • It's kind of a toss up. The sourcing in the article is relatively weak, but I did find this news article at Highbeam. I'm not sure how this would go at AfD if it went up. The sourcing is weak, but he could possibly pass NARTIST. I'll leave it up to you, whether or not it goes to AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:16, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

User:HenrytheV[edit]

User created a very short article on an almost certainly non-notable living person claiming that they committed a crime.

I saw this through NPP and found this pretty alarming (this person has not been even arrested, let alone convicted). I tagged for deletion as an attack page and GBFan deleted, and put an explanation on their talk page.

They responded by setting their user page to its current form. I'm about to tag the image for deletion on Wikimedia as it's a copyvio too. Blythwood (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Naveen Naqvi page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naveen_Naqvi[edit]

The birthdate on this page [1] has been corrected by a user, but it still shows when googled as the incorrect date citing wikipedia. Please help resolve this issue. Thanks in advance. Aphanti (talk) 06:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE_%D0%AF%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2[edit]

Dear Sir,

I am Bulgarian. This morning I tried to find an article in the Bulgarian Wikipedia about Mr. Yanko Yankov (Янко Янков), a prominent Bulgarian dissident who was thrown by the communists into prison for political activities. I found a disambiguation page about Yanko Yankov (five people), none of whom is the dissident. One of the articles is about a completely unknown football player. I find this a DISGRACE!!!

Mr. Yankov spent several years in prison, to be freed some days before the fall of Todor Zhivkov's regime, 11 November 1989. Mr. Yankov lectured law at Sofia University when he was sentenced. After the establishment of democracy in Bulgaria he was promoted to the position of professor, to be soon dismissed again from his post, for not conforming to the policies of the current academic administration, still controlled by communists.

Dear Sir, I myself do not have the necessary information to be able to write an article about Mr. Yankov. But I find that it must be in the responsibilities of the Bulgarian Wikipedia editors to find someone knowledgeable who can make up for the disgraceful omission described above.

Thank you very much for your attention and have a nice day!

Krasimir Kabakciev, Dr.Sc. Sofia, Bulgaria Tel.: 00359889889813 Email: kkabakciev at gmail dot com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.90.137.139 (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Roger_Achkar page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Achkar[edit]

There is a lot of misinformation and bad sources in this article. Most of the citations used lead to websites with wrong links or websites that never existed.

All the edits are done by the spouse of the subject of the article along with the subject himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.171.188.186 (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naveen_Naqvi
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&oldid=699979719"