Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
And again on why it should remain deleted until our dispute is resolved, "Article improvement to a neutral high quality standard is preferred if possible, with dubious material removed if necessary until issues related to quality of sources, neutrality of presentation, and general appropriateness in the article have been discussed and resolved. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is sourced to good quality sources, neutral, and on-topic." ] (]) 00:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
And again on why it should remain deleted until our dispute is resolved, "Article improvement to a neutral high quality standard is preferred if possible, with dubious material removed if necessary until issues related to quality of sources, neutrality of presentation, and general appropriateness in the article have been discussed and resolved. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is sourced to good quality sources, neutral, and on-topic." ] (]) 00:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
:The source appears to be a legit online source, based in Memphis, complete with weather and sports. ''Your'' reason for removing sourced material however are questionable, and as such can be seen to be vandalism. You have already rolled through 3RR, I suggest you re-consider reverting again until you can explain your motives. ] (]) 00:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
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 part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama
This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
The section on Controversy about the web site and the mishandling of conduct should remain deleted under the guidelines provided in Misplaced Pages's policy on Biographies of Living Persons. The burden of proof on keeping these sections is on keeping them not deleting them. As the policy clearly states, "Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Aletheiaeleutheroseihymas (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
The sources here are newspaper articles from a major city's most prominent daily newspaper. A reliable source by any measure. As far as I can tell, nothing in this article is sourced directly to the website in question. Please note that stating that the website existed is not the same as referencing material in this article to said website. The sections you continue to blank are well-sourced. Please describe why the Commercial Appeal is not a reliable source for the information found in this article. Interwebs (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Furthermore, you have not explained why you continue to delete the "Handling of minister misconduct" subsection, when it does not reference the website at all. That makes it difficult to assume good faith on your part. Interwebs (talk) 23:43, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I am deleting the section because the policy on the Biographies of Living Persons encourages deletion on contentious material that is poorly sourced. A newspaper article is not necessarily a good source regarding contentious material on a living person. Misplaced Pages requires a higher standard on sources and favors the reputation of the person.
Again, from the policy, " The burden of evidence for any edit on Misplaced Pages rests with the person who adds or restores material, and this is especially true for material regarding living persons. Therefore, an editor should be able to demonstrate that such material complies with all Misplaced Pages content policies and guidelines."
I'm not sure what you mean by your difficulty in assuming good faith on my part. I am simply trying to enforce the policy. These newspaper articles are about contentious opinions about a person. They cannot be accessed online and verified. It simply seems to me that Misplaced Pages intends to require a higher standard for sources than this especially when it is contentious material about a living person. I recommend that we follow the policy and delete the material while we request an editing dispute resolution. Is that fair enough? Aletheiaeleutheroseihymas (talk) 00:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Another relevant section from Misplaced Pages's policy on Biographies of Living Persons: "Misplaced Pages articles that present material about living people can affect their subjects' lives. Misplaced Pages editors who deal with these articles have a responsibility to consider the legal and ethical implications of their actions when doing so. It is not Misplaced Pages's purpose to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy.
When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. In the best case, it can lead to an unencyclopedic article. In the worst case, it can be a serious violation of our policies on neutrality. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic." Aletheiaeleutheroseihymas (talk) 00:21, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
And again on why it should remain deleted until our dispute is resolved, "Article improvement to a neutral high quality standard is preferred if possible, with dubious material removed if necessary until issues related to quality of sources, neutrality of presentation, and general appropriateness in the article have been discussed and resolved. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is sourced to good quality sources, neutral, and on-topic." Aletheiaeleutheroseihymas (talk) 00:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
The source appears to be a legit online source, based in Memphis, complete with weather and sports. Your reason for removing sourced material however are questionable, and as such can be seen to be vandalism. You have already rolled through 3RR, I suggest you re-consider reverting again until you can explain your motives. Darrenhusted (talk) 00:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
