| Revision as of 03:09, 28 August 2015 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,548 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Nomoskedasticity/Archives) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:41, 28 August 2015 edit undoMrX (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers97,648 edits NotificationNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| I'm not going to argue it, but it's a third source used to cite the same sentence, which already has two sources attached to it. I don't see it as supplemental, either - the source consists of the same information (which the writer is summarizing), followed by the writer's opinion piece about "the enablers" (unnamed) needing to be held accountable. There's nothing new or different about it that is of encyclopedic value - it's OVERCITE (and source dumping) to show that quantity of rehashed information in local news = notability. I'd personally rather somebody dealt with the lack of bio in a BLP, and the article creator's reversion of biographical data as "unsourced hagiography" from ASU's website. ] (]) 22:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC) | I'm not going to argue it, but it's a third source used to cite the same sentence, which already has two sources attached to it. I don't see it as supplemental, either - the source consists of the same information (which the writer is summarizing), followed by the writer's opinion piece about "the enablers" (unnamed) needing to be held accountable. There's nothing new or different about it that is of encyclopedic value - it's OVERCITE (and source dumping) to show that quantity of rehashed information in local news = notability. I'd personally rather somebody dealt with the lack of bio in a BLP, and the article creator's reversion of biographical data as "unsourced hagiography" from ASU's website. ] (]) 22:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ==ARCA notification== | |||
| You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at ] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the ] may be of use. | |||
| Thanks,<!-- Template:Arbitration CA notice --> | |||
Revision as of 11:41, 28 August 2015
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Susya delete
You deleted material from Susya while a discussion is taking place on the talk page. Please join it before you delete again. Settleman (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Shapps
The source very carefully avoids accusing Shapps of any wrongdoing ... which we ought well follow. The current use makes it quite appear that the living person operated an illegal pyramid scheme. Which is not claimed in the source given. No charges brought, and so no reason to maintain this bit in a BLP IMO. Collect (talk) 23:20, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Collect
Might be wise to back off Collect for a while, he's feeling persecuted and there are lots of eyes on him right now. Just my $0.02. Guy (Help!) 14:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Whitaker rv
I'm not going to argue it, but it's a third source used to cite the same sentence, which already has two sources attached to it. I don't see it as supplemental, either - the source consists of the same information (which the writer is summarizing), followed by the writer's opinion piece about "the enablers" (unnamed) needing to be held accountable. There's nothing new or different about it that is of encyclopedic value - it's OVERCITE (and source dumping) to show that quantity of rehashed information in local news = notability. I'd personally rather somebody dealt with the lack of bio in a BLP, and the article creator's reversion of biographical data as "unsourced hagiography" from ASU's website. MSJapan (talk) 22:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
ARCA notification
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: Collect and others and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Misplaced Pages:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks,