Talk:Tom Walkinshaw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if 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

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	This article is part of WikiProject Formula One, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Formula One, including drivers, teams and constructors, events and history. Feel free to join the project and help with any of the tasks or consult the project page for further information. View the task list Discuss the project Help out with Portal:Formula One
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-Importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Holden cheater award etc

Hi. I think I need to explain at greater length why it is that your recent additions to this page are not suitable for Wikipedia. This does not have anything in particular to do with your views on Tom Walkinshaw, whether they be right or wrong - I don't follow Aussie V8 racing. For the record I'm not a particular fan of Mr Walkinshaw.

The first few times this text was added it was done with no indication of its source and therefore appeared to stand as encyclopedic content in its own right. It therefore did not meet several Wikipedia guidelines - WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:LIVING being the most obvious (click on the blue links to see what these say). The little that did not immediately fall foul of those guidelines was eventually left and I have started to reference the article, which gave no sources for any of its content, to give a more consistent approach.

You have now specified that the words you are adding are from a motorsports forum. This puts things in a slightly different light, the presumed intention being to quote what others are saying, not to push the information as encyclopedic content in itself. Nonetheless, generally forums are not acceptable sources for Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Bulletin_boards.2C_wikis_and_posts_to_Usenet. I would also question whether someone's post, no matter how amusing or accurate you may find it, is notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia (See WP:NOTABLE).

As you are on a changing IP address I can't reliably contact you to open a discussion. I hope that you will feel able to discuss why you think the material should be included on this talk page.

Cheers. 4u1e 15:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] REPLY

Hi, I'm the user that added the material referring to the source as a forum. However, I didn't add the previous entries (they are documented as being there and being deleted/ reposted in a Ford forum)

I have strong feelings towards the issue, so when I went to the page via link to find it had been removed, I copied it from the forum and re added it. I knew it would porbably be deleted anyway, it was mostly subjective. But if you know the sport, then you know there is truth behind it and as a registered user, I have every confidence that you can appropriately document the issue.

Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.162.192.4 (talk) 12:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC).