Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

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 7 days archived by ClueBot III. (For help, see Wikipedia:Purge)
Search this noticeboard & archives Additional notes: Note that edits by the subject of an article may be welcome in some cases. Place the {{BLP noticeboard}} template on the talk page of articles that are being discussed here, and remove it when the discussion is resolved. For general content disputes regarding biographical articles, consider using Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies instead. All editors are encouraged to assist fellow editors regarding the reports below. Administrators should review enforcement instructions.
To start a new request, enter the name of the relevant article below:

Centralized discussion

• Paid use of administrator tools
• How to use and populate new magic word for article descriptions

Hannah Holborn Gray

Hanna Holborn Gray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

In the body of the article about Hannah you mention that she was at Northwestern University, Evanston campus, however in the chronological listing you don't mention Northwestern Unversity!!!!!She was also Dean of Woman at NU. Please contact her office or Northwestern University and correct this omission. Much appreciated.......Quecumquae sunt veritas!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:b02b:848e:f936:e48c:c029:4e95 (talk) 11:05, 24 October 2017‎

Glenn R. Simpson

• Glenn R. Simpson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

"However the Republican donor soon dropped out of what Simpson and Fusion GPS were doing. The Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign for president picked up the deal with Fusion GPS and funded the remaining political assignation of Donald Trump before he was elected the 45th President of the United States"

There are so sources. This Fusion GPS ordeal is conspiratorial so keeping the pages as informative and perhaps unassuming seems important. Currently, the article does not source and does not seem to provide a verifiable, neutral point of view.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:547:901:6570:79dc:deea:ae1e:8a5e (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2017‎ (UTC)

 Done Removed. Codyorb (talk) 04:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

'cosmo jarvis' wiki page

• Cosmo Jarvis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello,

The information presented here on Cosmo Jarvis is not up to date and ignores many developments in recent years. Especially in '2010 to present' section - here there are many informations which are lacking or which, if included while others are not, creates an article which requires more detail and overall context to shed light on his recent works (especially as an actor in theatre, TV and FILM)

(see here) http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4008605/

His involvement with 'Hawke the movie' while correct information should not be featured at the expense of other, more notable, widely distributed and arguable more significant works.

I am suggesting the need for a revision/update on this page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.215.89 (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2017‎ (UTC)

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

Gerald Caplan article has no sources, (both links given are broken). There is no indication of importance other than books written by Gerald Caplan.

The subject's Notability is not verifiable. Aside from Gerald Caplan's wikipedia, Any general google search brings up a myriad of other Gerald Caplan's, none of whom have a wikipedia.

Try googling "gerald caplan canadian politician" to see that finding any evidence for any of the articles claims are obscure, if they even exist.

At best he is an obscure journalist with academic credentials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmacmil (talk • contribs) 04:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Fair point. I will nominate it for deletion on your behalf. Malinaccier (talk) 01:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

J Roberto Trujillo

J. Roberto Trujillo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Self published inaccurate sources and information (verification?). No citations.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.81.183 (talk) 19:09, December 24, 2017‎

Dulwich College Beijing

This edit might need scrutiny. I reverted pending post here. One source is the Mirror, but the other two might be reliable enough for this sort of content. Thanks, -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

• The edit was bit undue imo, looking at the sources, only one good one mentions the Dulich and only in regards to Neal McGowan, I expect the others did work at Dulich but the reporting is not focused on that connection so the addition as presented seems to me like a bit of an attack on the school. Disclaimer, I didn't click on the daily mail link. Govindaharihari (talk) 12:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
• Update - it's been replaced again (I have removed it) by a new user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/1748283-021jfkldajfkldarourkeajnd,manfda has moved to talk page arbitration? Govindaharihari (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
• Note. I've fully protected this for a week to ensure some stability during this (and other) discussions. GedUK  14:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Kam Williams

Kam Williams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Only functioning source is a Rotten Tomatoes profile that is equally likely to be fabricated. All other web sources do not exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rippy.zippy (talk • contribs) 19:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Actually they do indeed seem to exist.--Auric talk 01:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

They look to be consistently crappy, not reliable-third-party sources. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

True, but still a long way from nonexistent.--Auric talk 22:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Max Landis

I reverted some recent pending changes to Max Landis but would like a second opinion from other editors. There were two versions:

• The first I feel clearly did not meet the sourcing requirements for BLPCRIME [1]
• The second is sourced to the Daily Beast [2]

My opinion was that the Daily Beast is not strong enough sourcing for these types of allegations. I checked and it is not currently being reported anywhere else. Should we wait add these allegations to the article with the Daily Beast source? Seraphim System ^(talk) 21:08, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Definitely throw concern of only coverage by the Beast. Even if included, it definitely should not be in the lede until it becomes more recognized by more reliable sources. --Masem (t) 21:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

IPs keep trying to add this, and I keep reverting as a BLP violation - if anyone thinks this can be added based on the Daily Beast source, then please comment.Seraphim System ^(talk) 07:34, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Sources are blogs and a twitter feed. Quoting directly from one of the sources: "it’s true that these are allegations on Twitter, many of them second-hand, and I haven’t seen any stories yet from a publication with fact-checkers and vetting."[3] Seems like a very good reason not to put this in an encyclopedia article. -- Euryalus (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

George H.W. Bush

Accusations of inappropriate behavior have been flying in the #MeToo affair and resulted in a paragraph on the subject that is longer than the one describing his CIA career. I've made a (contested) BLP-call and reduced the section to a mention of the allegations (i.e. not detailing them), mostly since an old man telling dirty jokes isn't the crime of the century and GHW Bush no longer is a public figure by our definitions. I also think the paragraph gave WP:UNDUE weight to minor incidents. This was challenged. Can I have a few eyes on the article and perhaps (an)other opinion(s). Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Kleuske, although I agree with you that the previous version was too lengthy and too detailed, I think that you have swing the pendulum way too far in the opposite direction. A Bush spokesperson has acknowledged that the incidents took place. If you really believe that a long pattern of uninvited groping of the buttocks of various women, many of them strangers, accompanied by the same crude "cop a feel" joke, constitutes "minor incidents", then I wonder whether you are capable of neutral editing regarding sexual harassment. I consider all living former presidents to be public figures. By the way, at least one allegation of groping took place when Bush was president. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:00, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Cullen328: I do differentiate between things like rape (major incident) on the one hand and 'inappropriately touching' and telling corny jokes (minor incident) on the other. If you can't distinguish between those two, I'm afraid I must return the compliment about "editing neutrally". Nevertheless, I welcome your comments on the talk-page. Kleuske (talk) 11:24, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Repeatedly touching various women's buttocks without permission is not "minor", Kleuske. It is sexual assault, and you initially characterized the behavior as "telling dirty jokes". What's up with that? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Cullen328: If it's "sexual assualt", as you claim, where's the police reports? Sexual assault is a felony, after all, and rightly so. This isn't. If I qualified every time someone touched my butt without consent as a 'major incident', I'd kill myself. And if you're under the illusion it's just the guys doing that, you're sorely mistaken. It's a relatively unisex behavior. Hence my qualification as a 'minor incident' and I stick with that. If only to give myself some room when discussing rape or actual sexual assault. Neutrality entails not over-dramatizing minor incidents, retaining some sense of proportion. Kleuske (talk) 13:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

There's a difference between touching and groping. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC) How often have people "squeezed [your] butt, hard" (without consent). Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Well... You're the expert, apparently. To answer that I'd need to know what force (how many Newtons) you require to satisfy the "squeezed [my] butt, hard" part before I can specify each and every incident to satisfy your curiosity. Kleuske (talk) 11:20, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Consider that a search on "george bush" "heather lind" brings nearly no sources since mid-Nov (the accusation in October) tells me that this was seen as a non-story at this point, at least w.r.t. to Bush. (future articles on the #metoo movement do show him as an example of someone that wasn't knocked from a pedestal when the charges can to light, unlike say Spacey or Lewis CK). I think you can afford one or two more sentences, but one of those has to be Bush's acknowledgement and apology for it, and that's pretty much it. --Masem (t) 14:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it doesn't look like it affected his legacy or image or anything much, so can't have too much on it. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I can agree to that. Kleuske (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Kirk Simon profile on Google from Wikipedia

Kirk Simon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Kirk Simon is married to Mina Farbood. Married in NY on 10/3/12. Wikipedia via Google states another person. Please correct. Can forward marriage certificate. Page is locked to me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:F982:E700:5949:5E3C:7788:BE60 (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

That's an issue with Google's cache, not necessarily us. It takes a few days for Google to update when things are changed on our end. (Our article, in fact, doesn't even mention his marital status, unless you mean a different Kirk Simon.) —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 00:39, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Kirk Simon and Karen Goodman have collaborated as filmmakers for many years. A 1989 New York Times article states that they were married at that time. That article is used as a reference in Goodman's biography which states she is married to Simon. Perhaps they are no longer married and he has married someone else. However, we cannot use a marriage certificate for this purpose, since that is a primary document, and there are many people named "Kirk Simon". We need something like a press report that says that Oscar winning documentary filmmaker Simon is married to Farbood. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

That would explain the OP's complaint. I assumed it was an issue with Simon's article because she didn't mention Goodman what-so-ever. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 06:43, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Right, OP is complaining about what Google says. There's a feedback button at the bottom of the Google infobox on a subject that will let you tell Google that something is incorrect. That said, it's usually worth double-checking whether our coverage here on Wikipedia or on Wikidata is incorrect when there's a BLP concern. OP shoudl use Google's feedback form since it doesn't look like there's an error on our end. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 07:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Dean Dunham article

Eyes are needed at Dean Dunham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).

Look at the edit history and you will see what I mean. IP edit warring, and so on. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Reverted to October 31 stub condition. All the additions since then violate WP:BLP in one way or several. The article should prbably be deleted entirely. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:38, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

J04n has removed the article. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:04, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

• I should not have deleted this as a BLP prod, references exist in a former version. Feel free to nominate for deletion or page protection as you see fit. --J04n(talk page) 12:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

During a WP:BEFORE search, I found enough to demonstrate probable GNG compliance, so I added four references and some cat's. It's probably enough to retain, but also likely not much more than a perma-stub. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

The IP editor (86.132.130.243 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) has continued negative BLP additions. They appear to be a SPA and I don't want to start edit-warring so I'd appreciate it if more eyes were applied. I've dropped a uw-biog2 warning on their talk page. Thanks. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:19, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Eggishorn, thanks for your help. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm currently watching the article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:03, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I have just created a page for Arjun Malhotra. But a salutation Shri got copied to the title by mistake. Please remove it.

Shri Arjun Malhotra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I have just created a page for Arjun Malhotra. But a salutation Shri got copied to the title by mistake. Please remove it.

Shreyoshi ghosh (talk) 18:41, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Shreyoshi Ghosh

Shreyoshi ghosh The title Arjun Malhotra is currently salted as a result of repeated recreation despite several deletions and discussion. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Shreyoshi ghosh, and I suspect you know this. Please do not recreate the article again or you may be blocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:52, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

George Ciccariello-Maher

I looked up the subject because he was in the news due to his resigntion. I found an article that describes his as being influenced by Karl Marx and advocating for white genocide. I cleaned up the infobox and the lead a bit (diff), and I wonder if any interested editor could have a look at the article. Thank you. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:19, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

He states that the "white genocide" tweet was a joke, but he certainly has a tendency to make inflammatory comments. I expanded the reference to today's CNN article on his resignation. More eyes would be useful since I am off to bed soon. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:03, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I'll take a look. He's been an on-again, off-again interest of mine for his access to various Chavista groups and I very briefly corresponded with him a few years back. A lot of nuance is lost in translation with younger academics like him who mix social media and contemporary leftist terminology. LargelyRecyclable (talk) 09:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Gavin Andresen

Gavin Andresen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

"and by 2011 was designated by Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin, as lead developer on Bitcoin Core"

No he was not. There is no evidence that satoshi designated Gavin as the "lead developer". Gavin took the source code and uploaded it to sourceforge after satoshi left and there is not a single post by satoshi claiming gavin is to be the "lead developer" of anything.

Please remove this line as its factually incorrect and misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.40.118.131 (talk) 05:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

That sentence is sourced to an MIT Technology Review article. Are you disputing that the source supports the claim, or are you disputing the accuracy of the source? MPS1992 (talk) 17:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Christine Talbot

Christine's stated year of birth (1969) is almost certainly incorrect, since she would then have been aged only 15 at the start of the NCTJ course in Preston in 1984, open only at the time to A-level leavers (aged 18) or graduates (typically 21). Therefore Christine's true date of birth will be between 1963 and 1966.

If we accept the section stating she was at NCTJ when it says she was, the DOB is likely incorrect. The source for the section on her NCTJ attendance is currently unavailable, and there is no source for the DOB, so I have removed the DOB pending confirmation. Only in death does duty end (talk) 12:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Doug Ford Jr.

• Doug Ford Jr. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This biography of Doug Ford, controversial former Toronto mayor Rob Ford's brother, has recently been edited by a few accounts that look like throwaways, removing well-sourced negative information for being "outdated" or "unconfirmed" (see [4]). It just so happens that Mr. Ford is expected to run (or has already announced he is running?) for his late brother's old seat in next year's election. Can someone take a look at these edits please and consider watchlisting this article? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Restraining order, battery and sexual assault content at Shannon Sharpe article

In November, I reverted myself (followup note here) on restoring the sexual assault content to Shannon Sharpe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). This is because the allegations were dismissed. But earlier this month, Jimmyk23 (talk · contribs) added material on the matter.

Thoughts? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:11, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Probably best left off the page since they are allegations and he has yet to be arrested or charged. Meatsgains (talk) 23:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

My take: I think it is too soon, however, we always push for NPOV which would be showing all sides, and according to the source, Sharpe decided to "step aside" as a CBS sports analyst. This is certainly noteworthy content and hard to just end on that note. The "can of worms" is national media attention as to the reason he stepped down. Regardless of the outcome of any other events.

What I see as a problem: The Wikipedia content "Bundy accused Sharpe of sexual assault and threatening her life, according to legal documents obtained by SportsByBrooks Bundy was allegedly forced to have sex with Sharpe". I can find nothing on SportsByBrooks at all, let alone to corroborate what the article states, only what is written by other sources such as the "CBS/AP" report and echoed by other news media. If included it would seem that the article content should be worded something like: A "CBS AP report states that "according to legal documents obtained by SportsByBrooks...", and the link to the CBS AP source. Otr500 (talk) 00:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Aga Khan IV

Aga Khan IV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello, I just noticed that the Aga Khan IV is referred to as the fourth "Imam and Turd" of his sect, and I'm not sure if "Turd" here signifies something other than its meaning in the English language, or if someone thought it would be funny to add that in the English meaning. Thought I should warn you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.236.200 (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Have removed "and Turd". Edwardx (talk) 15:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Jedwabne pogrom article

This article currently alleges that a Polish politician named Anna Zalewska has denied the commonly accepted reality that Poles participated in the anti-Semitic Jedwabne pogrom during the Holocaust. It would be scandalous if accurate, and would rightly damage her reputation. But to assert she made the denial, the article uses a reference to the newspaper Haaretz, which alleges the denial in its commentary. The newspaper quotes some of her rather contorted and equivocating statements, none of which specifically makes the denial, but it is the newspaper which says these statements are a denial. Per WP:NEWSORG, Wikipedia policy doesn't support us treating commentary as reliable statement of fact. We can use the newspaper as a source for her statements, and we might even be able to say that the newspaper made the allegation that these are a denial, but Wikipedia cannot state the denial as fact. Moreover WP:SAID tells us to be shy of using the word 'deny' in the first place, and it converges here with WP:BLP's instructions for us to take particular care about what we say about living persons - especially in such volatile and litigious subject areas as the Holocaust. The Talk page discussion is live, please contribute and help us find a resolution. -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:38, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Note this is not an opinion piece or commentary - but news reporting by Haaretz which is generally considered a fairly solid RS.Icewhiz (talk) 15:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I am using the term 'commentary' here to describe the newspaper's commentary within its news report; the report itself alleges the quote it has taken from a separate TV report is in fact a denial. According to its own policy Wikipedia is unable to make this statement of fact, just because Haaretz does. (We might be able to state specifically that Haaretz says it is fact, however.) This is the spirit of the policy and my rationale is unchanged. -Chumchum7 (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Looking at other sources, express doubt or questions seems closer to what RS are saying, however there aren't many english sources. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

The paragraph in our Jedwabne pogrom article as tweaked by Icewhiz seems a not unreasonable reflection of what is in the Haaretz article. Edwardx (talk) 15:52, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Edward I think the point is that Icewhiz is now referring to other sources in addition to Haaretz, to get a consensus of sources. It appears to me that Haaretz made a slightly sensationalized interpretation of comments by the living person, as other sources don't describe what she said as a 'denial'. That's why BLP, SAID, and NEWSORG override V here. We could replace Haaretz with one of the other sources or at least add the sources Icewhiz has gone and found. -Chumchum7 (talk) 17:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes. I think Haaretz's parsing of the original comments was reasonable, and it is a strong RS, however as other sources (all be it some of lower quality) parsed in a more qualified way than outright denial it was appropriate to modify the article (to "expressed doubt") per the balance in the sources as well as erring on the side of caution.Icewhiz (talk) 18:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

I now see that Google Translate shows she has since clarified her stance: [5] That source is in Polish, it looks like English-language newspapers have cared less that she now says Poles share responsibility for the massacre. But nevertheless it seems in keeping with right of reply standards to add it now. -Chumchum7 (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Defamatory vandalism at James F. Amos

I've reverted several days' worth of vandalism--my concern is that the older stuff is defamatory, and may require rev/deletion. My disappointment is that this sort of stuff can get placed into the lede of a BLP and sit there for an indefinite length of time before being spotted. I'd prefer to report this at ANI, but that page is protected. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm sorry it took this long to sport your post, but the edits have now been hidden. - Bilby (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Jed Brophy

The stated place of birth (Fielding, NZ) on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jed_Brophy is incorrect, the subject and multiple reasonable sources state the place of birth as Taihape, NZ. I have added a request to the Talk page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jed_Brophy to have this changed, or at least broadened to simply "New Zealand" if there is too much doubt. The help page suggested I could remove or correct errors of fact myself but given I'm a new account it seemed more appropriate to do the Talk comment and follow this process. Phirate (talk) 22:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Now

Resolved

by an unregistered editor and the formatting -- an inline citation -- added by me. Yes it's fine to correct things like this yourself, whether new or not. If an article is so sensitive that new accounts shouldn't be changing it, then it won't let you edit it anyway. Often only temporarily. MPS1992 (talk) 14:09, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

David Wolfe (entrepreneur)

Hi! As additional perspectives might help, over at Talk:David Wolfe (entrepreneur) we're having a bit of a back-and-forth about the sourcing for a claim on David Wolfe. The original statement in the article was:

He advocates that people with cancer take dietary supplements instead of getting medical treatment, which he describes as "largely a fraud."

Two sources are used. The first, from Slate, only supports the first half, (that he advocates for complementary medicine as a means of fighting cancer), but doesn't say that he recommends people use dietary supplements instead of seeking medical treatment.

The second source is a self-published contributor article in Forbes. That one quotes the "Don’t cry Wolfe" Facebook page as the source for the claim that he "will dissuade your dying relative from seeking life saving cancer treatment". It also links to a meme posted by Wolfe on his Facebook page which quotes Linus Pauling saying "Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them".

My reading is that the Forbes and Facebook posts are self published and therefore per WP:BLPSPS are not strong enough to support the contentious statement, and that the Pauling quote shows - at best - that Wolfe may be opposed to some (or most?) cancer research, but not that he advocates avoiding medical treatment for cancer. However, it is claimed that WP:PARITY allows for poorer quality sources in fringe topics, and therefore we can use the Forbes article as a source for the claim, even though it is self published.

Considering WP:PARITY, is the Forbes article sufficiently reliable for the claim? - Bilby (talk) 02:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

The OP is a misrepresentation and offered without sources and far from neutral.

A neutral and accurate posting here would be:

We are having a disagreement about content and sourcing at David Wolfe (entrepreneur), and both BLP and PSCI are relevant. The most recent content offered is:

He advocates that people with cancer treat it with dietary supplements, and according to Kavin Senapathy he advocates that people with cancer avoid medical treatment for cancer because it is “largely a fraud.”

References

Please comment. Thanks.

-- Jytdog (talk) 03:21, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

The "OP" (well, me) did provide sources in the above, and I also noted that I had only provided the original statement from the article. I guess I should also note in regard to the new wording discussed that a) Senapathy didn't actually say herself that Wolfe advocated "that people with cancer avoid medical treatment for cancer", but instead quoted a Facebook page that made the statement, and b) that Wolfe did not say that medical treatment was "largely a fraud", because that quote was not from Wolfe, and because it was in regard to cancer research, not treatment. - Bilby (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Will Bashor

• Will Bashor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This is an obvious autobiography, and one of the books upon which it relies for the claim of notability is self-published, but is this subject notable? Guy (Help!) 15:29, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Some red flags: The article lists "teaches at Ohio Dominican University yet their faculty directory does not include him. The most significant academic notice for his work is listed as receiving the "Adele Mellen Prize for Distinguished Scholarship", a prize apparently given by the Edwin Mellen Press, a publisher with certain credibility issues to one of its authors. I'm also unsure about the "2013 USA Best Book Awards"[6],[7]. Marie Antoinette's Head has, however, received enough coverage to be notable ([8], [9], [10], [11]) so the best course is probably to have an article about it and redirect the author's name to the book. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Laura Jane Grace

The Laura Jane Grace bio page lists her deadname immediately after her legal name; this should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntigonesAncestor (talk • contribs) 20:09, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@AntigonesAncestor: Only if the subject became notable after the name change. This isn't the case here. See Chaz Bono for example. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

In addition, she doesn't seem to mind her dead name being mentioned, given that she was famous prior to transition. She's even joked about reclaiming the name on Twitter (though I won't link to it, since it's possibly a BLPVIO itself). Woodroar (talk) 20:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Just a question in passing she is in the Category:Lesbian musicians which doesnt appear to be mentioned in the article. MilborneOne (talk) 20:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

She referred to her ex-wife and herself as a "lesbian couple". That should probably be in the article somewhere, but I don't know where. Woodroar (talk) 21:43, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Fabio Descalzi

The writer and translator Fabio Descalzi portrayed on the article happens to be me, User:Fadesga (although the article makes no direct mention to the fact of being a Wikipedist).

There happens to be a [list of Wikipedians with articles] - please consider if this article incurs in any conflicts of interest. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 20:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Flamingoflorida

Actually, the concerns are raised on the editor's talk page about members of their family and errors in the articles about them. The user is now blocked. If someone could look into the matters raised, perhaps we might resolve the issues that led to the socking. I had a hard time parsing the information there. Might be me. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Alice Walton

Alice Walton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I invite editors to join this discussion at Talk:Alice Walton. Another editor and I have been discussing the appropriateness of including car accidents that never resulted in charges, as well as an arrest that never resulted in charges and was, in fact, expunged from the record. I'm bringing this to the attention of this noticeboard again as I believe this issue may fall under BLP guidelines, and my original message here from when I initially requested the edit has been archived. I welcome any input from editors who are experienced in this area.

I will not directly edit the article because I have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; I work with the Walton family office, as I disclosed on my user page and Talk:Alice Walton. Thanks, Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 21:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I think the Acapulco incident should be kept. It never resulted in charges, but there is no implication it was criminal. What it did result in was severe damage to the article subject, a leg broken in multiple places, leaving it shorter than the other,[12] and she still walks with a limp, 40 years later. That's a rather important part of her life, there would be a lot missing if we left it out. I do think we should remove the 2011 incident - as you write, it did not result in any charges, and there is no evidence it made much of a difference in the subject's life. Lots of people have DWI arrests expunged, it's not particularly notable. It's slightly more notable since it's possibly part of a series, as noted in the Forbes article, and again since she did release a public statement, but only slightly; on the whole I think we should leave it out. (I made a few hopefully uncontentious edits to the relevant article section, but didn't remove this part since there is room for debate for a bit.) --GRuban (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Angana P. Chatterji

Angana P. Chatterji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello, I'm requesting some help. I am wondering if Medium is sufficient as a source for a BLP on this page and am concerned about the precedent that this creates for other BLPs. Also, it seems like this is a case of someone whose own experiences and process ended 10 years ago, now commenting on a termination that took place 6 years ago... does this belong in a BLP article? Again, concerned about the precedent this may set for BLPs in general. Thank you! Torren (talk) 02:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely not. That's a blog, not a news outlet or other source providing editorial oversight. It's basically an (incredibly long) rant giving the viewpoint of one single student. Everything they say may or may not be true; who knows, but there are way too many adjectives and conclusions without any real information. (ie: lots words like "cult-like environment" or "intimidation" but no description of acts that would allow me, the reader, to make the same conclusions.) It tells us a lot about the author's feelings but shows little in the way of facts. For all we know this former student may simply be overly sensitive or even misconstruing the situation to fit their own perspective. Maybe not, but that's why we can't accept a blog, especially by a person who obviously has a personal bias in the situation. Zaereth (talk) 02:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! Torren (talk) 04:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Altoona-Johnstown child sex abuse scandal

Draft:Altoona-Johnstown child sex abuse scandal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi all, I've just removed a considerable amount of detail from Draft:Altoona-Johnstown child sex abuse scandal which named a number of individuals found to have sexually abused children in a Grand Jury investigation. I haven't revision deleted any of the content yet as I wanted to get more opinions on whether including that detail is acceptable and on the future of the draft. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Some are confirmed dead like McCaa but the sourcing should still be improved regardless, there is no reason to cite to a Grand Jury report for anything other then what the Grand Jury report said. The section could be renamed "Grand Jury Investigation" instead of "Details of abuse", and revised to remove content about anyone who is not confirmed dead. SeraphWiki (talk) 09:59, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Tons of content have been readded by the drafts author. And I agree any material involving any living person sourced only to court documents needs to go, and it needs to go now, with a strong warning from an administrator that re-adding them will have severe consequences. John from Idegon (talk) 10:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

If alleged abusers have confessed to crimes against children during interviews conducted by the diocese and explained within the Grand Jury's report why do they need to go? Abuse has not only been committed but confirmed by the abusers.Cencoredme (talk) 10:49, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cencoredme:, please read this policy, particularly: Do not use trial transcripts and other court records...to support assertions about a living person.emphasis in original This absolute prohibition includes adding grand jury transcripts as sources. Note also that adding names sourced from such documents to Wikipedia articles may in some cases also violate the Terms of Use you agreed to follow when you created your account. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:19, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: If that is the case for a *living* person then so be it, the article has already been amended to reflect only those deceased and other details are from reliable articles such as the Guardian.Cencoredme (talk) 15:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cencoredme:, you asked why these needed to go and I wanted to make sure you were aware of the relevant policies. Thank you for saying you intend to comply with these. BLP's, particularly BLP about criminal allegations, are one area that we all need to be really, really strict about complying with the best sources. This protects both you and the project. Thanks again for understanding. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Cardi B

Cardi B (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

A large portion of this articles uses self-published sources or sources that includes blogs, gossip sites, and social media— Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.143.210 (talk) 09:26, January 4, 2018‎

It is not clear what you object to and this may be better discussed at the Cardi B talk page. That said, I see a lot of statements about Cardi B made by Cardi B on her social media accounts, which is accepted use within the Biographies of living persons policy: Never use self-published sources...unless written or published by the subject of the article.emphasis in original Sourcing statements in the article such as "She went on to attend Renaissance High School For Musical Theater & Technology..." to her Instagram account, for example, fits all the requirements of using self--published sources in BLP's. I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

1 Night in Paris dvd cover

1 Night in Paris (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The article 1 Night in Paris, is about a pornographic video of Paris Hilton released without her consent. The article contains a photo of the dvd cover, which contains images from the pornographic video. I nominated the photo for deletion ages ago, but the file was kept, and I then proceeded to forget all about it. Rather than re-nom for deletion, and be accused of beating a dead horse or ignoring consensus, I thought I'd bring the issue here. Taking into account BLP policies, is it appropriate to have such a photo on Wikipedia. Also while this isn't a topic I know too much about, would the presence of such a file be contrary to revenge porn laws recently introduced in various US states?Brustopher (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Chef Ingrid Hoffmann Wiki

Ingrid Hoffmann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I manage celebrity chef Ingrid Hoffmann. I have attempted to make changes to her bio a few times since some current info is wrong and I would also like to add the latest information. My changes keep getting reverted. How can I make changes to reflect her original bio? Dleon1077 (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Since you have a conflict of interest regarding the article subject, I would strongly advise that you read and follow the advice given in our guideline on editing with a conflict of interest. --Chris (talk) 19:33, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Mario Scaramella

Dear Sirs, this page was created in the year 2006 by different authors and substantially was not modified since that period, I only made little contributions to clarify details. on December 2017 a new unknown author Mrtno made a total change of the basic information (lawyer, academic and nuclear expert) quoting Mario Scaramella is NOT but he claims to be a lawyer etc. this means he is a fabricator and committed a fraud, the new author also stated Mario Scaramella wrote the article on his own. This change is very dangerous for the reputation of Professor Scaramella and is a defamation. The entire carreer of Professor Scaramella is reported on the www.litvinienkoenquiry.org (now at webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk) and the source quoted by the new author Mrtno (the Independent, article by Peter Popham) is declared by Judge Robert Owen of the High Court as fake and fabricated. It is important to remove the changes by the author MRTNO because this represent a clear and well documented libel. Please restore the original text wich represent the neutral contribution of dozens of different author and was well managed by administrators for more than 10 years. Thank you Mario Scaramella [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.22.29.204 (talk) 21:03, 4 January 2018 (UTC)