Talk:Susan Bradley: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:40, 30 June 2008 editMarionTheLibrarian (talk \| contribs)1,153 edits →Removing reliable sources: re← Previous edit		Revision as of 20:48, 30 June 2008 edit undoJokestress (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers50,851 edits →Removing reliable sources: replyNext edit →
Line 20:		Line 20:
	:::Nothing I have written is a personal attack. A series of edits to BLPs, however, all pasting in the same text, all containing undue weight towards the same political agenda, all of whom are involved in one's off-wiki behavior, violates BLP and COI.<br/>		:::Nothing I have written is a personal attack. A series of edits to BLPs, however, all pasting in the same text, all containing undue weight towards the same political agenda, all of whom are involved in one's off-wiki behavior, violates BLP and COI.<br/>
	:::—] (]) 20:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)		:::—] (]) 20:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
			::::Perhaps once we get the ] article set up, or whatever the final title is, we can simply wikilink to that and minimize the discussions. Also, the protest at the Bradley retrospective was newsworthy enough to be covered in the local press. Is there a reason we should not include that news item? Is there a better one? ] (]) 20:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:48, 30 June 2008

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
	An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Removing reliable sources

User:MarionTheLibrarian has recently removed a number of reliably-sourced statements from the article involving Bradley's work on gender identity disorder. I'd like to discuss this here. Generally, we don't remove reliable sources, but if there is an opposing view, we balance the two. Jokestress (talk) 19:00, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Jokestress created a bio page for someone whose ideas she has misrepresented and opposed off-wiki. Jokestress provided greatly undue weight to the issues on which Jokestress opposes the subject, ignoring all other aspects of the person. She is merely creating more WP pages to match her personal website (tsroadmap.com) wherever she can.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have tried to create a neutral balanced biography (about the 900th such article I have created here). The intro notes she is best known for childhood GID. We should discuss details of that in the body of the article. If you feel there was undue weight, please provide balancing material so the full scope of the coverage is reflected. Jokestress (talk) 19:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

No number of articles on neutral topics can protect one from creating biased ones about one's topic of sociopolitical interest.

If you really are interested in creating encyclopedic entries for Bradley or Zucker or Drescher, then you will enjoy doing your own homework instead of being content with pasting in the same old text. Creating pages just to have new pots for old venom is POV-pushing, not knowledge sharing.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 20:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Again, your ongoing accusations constitute incivility and personal attacks and do nothing to improve the articles. Let's discuss content and come to a compromise. If you have reliably-sourced information to include that you feel balances the article, please add it rather than removing reliably-sourced information. Jokestress (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing I have written is a personal attack. A series of edits to BLPs, however, all pasting in the same text, all containing undue weight towards the same political agenda, all of whom are involved in one's off-wiki behavior, violates BLP and COI.

—MarionTheLibrarian (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps once we get the Reparative therapy for gender variance article set up, or whatever the final title is, we can simply wikilink to that and minimize the discussions. Also, the protest at the Bradley retrospective was newsworthy enough to be covered in the local press. Is there a reason we should not include that news item? Is there a better one? Jokestress (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Categories: