| Revision as of 15:00, 7 February 2015 editLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,724 edits Adding RFC ID.← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:08, 7 February 2015 edit undoNomoskedasticity (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,756 edits →RfC: hmmNext edit → | ||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
| :''I have now been called antisemitic and intellectually unstable and a whole bunch of other silly things by the folks over at the Commentary blog. They want Time Magazine to fire or silence me. This is happening because I said something that is palpably true, but unspoken in polite society: There is a small group of Jewish neoconservatives who...Happily, these people represent a very small sliver of the Jewish population in this country...I remain proud of my Jewish heritage, a strong supporter of Israel and a realist about the slim chance of finding some common ground with the Iranians. But I am not willing to grant these ideologues the anonymity they seek. When Extremists Attack'' | :''I have now been called antisemitic and intellectually unstable and a whole bunch of other silly things by the folks over at the Commentary blog. They want Time Magazine to fire or silence me. This is happening because I said something that is palpably true, but unspoken in polite society: There is a small group of Jewish neoconservatives who...Happily, these people represent a very small sliver of the Jewish population in this country...I remain proud of my Jewish heritage, a strong supporter of Israel and a realist about the slim chance of finding some common ground with the Iranians. But I am not willing to grant these ideologues the anonymity they seek. When Extremists Attack'' | ||
| Of which the third is the closest to being an actual source, but only says "Jewish heritage" and a person might have Welsh heritage and not assert that they are "Welsh" , and a person with 1% African-American heritage might not call themselves "African American" as a self-identification. So should we adopt such ''indirect identification'' as being sufficient for categorization and description of living persons? (As "Jewish ethnicity" was also asserted, I suggest we well ought now include it here directly) ] (]) 14:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC) | Of which the third is the closest to being an actual source, but only says "Jewish heritage" and a person might have Welsh heritage and not assert that they are "Welsh" , and a person with 1% African-American heritage might not call themselves "African American" as a self-identification. So should we adopt such ''indirect identification'' as being sufficient for categorization and description of living persons? (As "Jewish ethnicity" was also asserted, I suggest we well ought now include it here directly) ] (]) 14:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| *This is a very odd RfC. If Collect's proposal passes, it wouldn't help Collect achieve the edit he wants to achieve on Joe Klein -- because this person quite sufficiently meets the self-identification and notability provisions of the proposed requirement. So I'm not opposed to it -- but it might help if Collect could clarify his agenda here. | |||
| *I'd also invite Collect to provide a diff for the assertion that someone has called him "anti-Semitic" -- that's a serious accusation, and if it's true then there should be a sanction. ] (]) 15:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:08, 7 February 2015
 | This is not the place to post information about living people. See creating an article for information on how to start a new article. |
| Skip to table of contents |
| BLP issues summary |
|---|
|
 | To discuss issues with specific biographies or personal mentions, please use the Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Biographies of living persons page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
 | See WP:PROPOSAL for Misplaced Pages's procedural policy on the creation of new guidelines and policies. See how to contribute to Misplaced Pages guidance for recommendations regarding the creation and updating of policy and guideline pages. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Biographies of living persons page. |
|
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58Auto-archiving period: 7 days |
Birth intros
Do we use (born date) or do we just go with (date), for the birtdate? GoodDay (talk) 07:24, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Typically (born date) if they are still living and (date – date) if they are not. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:41, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- My corrective edit got reverted, yesterday at Song Jia (actress, born 1962). I wasn't sure if I had done something wrong. GoodDay (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Death cause changed to drug overdose without a source
I don't know if I'm asking in the right place, so please direct me if I'm not. I'm concerned about edits made to Christine Cavanaugh's article, as her death cause was recently changed from undisclosed causes to drug overdose. No death cause has been disclosed as of yet, and I've since reverted the edits. Maybe I'm overreacting, but I feel like claiming someone died of a drug overdose could be a serious violation of policy. Could someone please advise? Thanks, Melonkelon (talk) 10:45, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- It is entirely reasonable and proper to insist on a Reliable Source for such a claim, and to revert in the absence of such. The RS guidelines spell this out clearly, and should you have problems you should point the other party at WP:RS, which says:
- Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.
- Hope this helps. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:28, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
RfC
 |
|
A discussion at Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Joe_Klein appears to state that a consensus of three editor overrides the requirement of direct self-identification for religious categorization in a BLP, finding indirect statements to be sufficient. In order to accommodate such a consensus, should WP:BLP be amended to state:
- Categories regarding ethnicity, religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has
publicly self-identifieddirectly or indirectly indicated any association with the ethnicitywith the, belief or orientation in question, and the subject's ethnicity,beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources. 14:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Discussion
The issue arose about Joe Klein who has repeatedly been described in his BLP as "Jewish" and having both religion and ethnicity as "Jewish" based on sources which do not directly affirm that he uses the specific label on himself.
The indirect sources used are:
- Listen, people can vote whichever way they want, for whatever reason they want. I just don't want to see policy makers who make decisions on the basis of whether American policy will benefit Israel or not. In some cases, you want to provide protection for Israel certainly, but you don't want to go to war with Iran. When Jennifer Rubin or Abe Foxman calls me antisemitic, they're wrong. I am anti-neoconservative. I think these people are following very perversely extremist policies and I really did believe that it was time for mainstream Jews to stand up and say, "They don't represent us, they don't represent Israel
And
- Joe Klein, a centrist columnist for Time magazine (and himself Jewish) wrote that the neocons pushed for the invasion 'to make the world safe for Israel'.
- I have now been called antisemitic and intellectually unstable and a whole bunch of other silly things by the folks over at the Commentary blog. They want Time Magazine to fire or silence me. This is happening because I said something that is palpably true, but unspoken in polite society: There is a small group of Jewish neoconservatives who...Happily, these people represent a very small sliver of the Jewish population in this country...I remain proud of my Jewish heritage, a strong supporter of Israel and a realist about the slim chance of finding some common ground with the Iranians. But I am not willing to grant these ideologues the anonymity they seek. When Extremists Attack
Of which the third is the closest to being an actual source, but only says "Jewish heritage" and a person might have Welsh heritage and not assert that they are "Welsh" , and a person with 1% African-American heritage might not call themselves "African American" as a self-identification. So should we adopt such indirect identification as being sufficient for categorization and description of living persons? (As "Jewish ethnicity" was also asserted, I suggest we well ought now include it here directly) Collect (talk) 14:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- This is a very odd RfC. If Collect's proposal passes, it wouldn't help Collect achieve the edit he wants to achieve on Joe Klein -- because this person quite sufficiently meets the self-identification and notability provisions of the proposed requirement. So I'm not opposed to it -- but it might help if Collect could clarify his agenda here.
- I'd also invite Collect to provide a diff for the assertion that someone has called him "anti-Semitic" -- that's a serious accusation, and if it's true then there should be a sanction. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2015 (UTC)