Talk:Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Some people insist on violating wiki policy ith this article, so to quote:
"Remove unsourced or poorly sourced negative material Editors should remove any negative material that is either unsourced or relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources from any page, including those concerning living persons and related talk pages, without discussion; this is also listed as an exception to the three-revert rule. This principle also applies to biographical material about living persons found anywhere in Wikipedia. Administrators may enforce the removal of unsourced material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked. See the blocking policy and Wikipedia:Libel.
Administrators encountering biographies that are unsourced and negative in tone, where there is no NPOV version to revert to, should delete the article without discussion (see WP:CSD criterion A6).
Jimmy Wales has said:
"I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." [2] He considers "no" information to be better than "speculative" information and reemphasizes the need for sensitivity:
"Real people are involved, and they can be hurt by your words. We are not tabloid journalism, we are an encyclopedia." [3] "
Dr U 08:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- I am very familiar with WP:BLP and read the comment from Jimbo some time back. I have sourced the claim from named authorities, which was not difficult. Guy 06:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
--Reburris 12:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I've added my notes from his Today Show appearence. Please forgive me if my method is a little too informal. I'm trying to expand the article with the little time that I can spare. I think this article will be worth keeping.
[edit] Edit by anon
[1] - anyone know if this is correct? JoshuaZ 04:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)