Talk:A. D. Winans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

An appropriate infobox needs to be added to this article, or the current infobox needs to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

This article as a whole isn't very well-written. Perhaps a clean-up? Kevin Doran 10:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Note that 67.150.244.188 has vandalised page once.

Two cases of vandalism from 67.150.245.175. Block or partial protection suggested. Kevin Doran 00:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I added a semi-protect of the article due to recent repeated vandalism. Kevin Doran 00:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

First, note that removal of text from the article by IPs were not vandalism, but were legitimate attempts to remove potentially libellous statements from the article, which were not supported by reliable sources. If a neutral article supported by reliable sources can be written on this topic, it may created in a temporary subpage. Do not include in this re-write any unsourced statements, especially negative, controversial, or potentially libellous ones. —Centrx→talk • 06:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

No, it was vandalism. And reliability of sources is open to interpretation. My own opinions can't be libelous if they're supported with evidence, which they were; and i don't think The American Dissident was unreliable -- it was more balanced and unbiased than me. . . . They were sourced, and what's wrong with negative comment -- it's all over Wikipedia. Thanks for the delete, anyway; we're better off, though i'm confused about this comment. Kevin Doran 11:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)