 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
It seems to me that the paragraph that keeps getting removed and reverted by Silver Buizel (talk · contribs) is running afoul of WP:UNDUE when applied to BLPs. Can we get consensus to just keep his divorce/alimony/etc information off the bio? §FreeRangeFrogcroak 00:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely correct - I've removed it, as well as the rest of the section because it was unsourced (which, unfortunately, was a decent portion of the article). --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you! §FreeRangeFrogcroak 02:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- What about the information is undue? There's nothing about the information that would suggest being bias in one direction or the other, therefore meeting WP:IMPARTIAL. The source is also clearly reliable under WP:SOURCES. Silver Buizel (talk) 03:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- The source is a website intended to shame the subjects. That's not really our thing - it isn't our job to shame anyone. If reliable sources pick up on this and it becomes a big deal, then maybe I'd feel differently. But from what I can tell, the issue (as well as Goodwin himself, for that matter) has received little to no coverage. And since the subject of the article apparently wants it out, I think the responsible thing to do is leave it out. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:38, 18 January 2013 (UTC)