Talk:Stephen Halbrook: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:05, 3 January 2014

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Amusing removal of well-sourced material -- midsentence!

User:Justanonymous added the entire Bernard Harcourt quotation on Halbrook to the article with the edit summary per WP:BLP we have to be discrete here about exactly what was said. Took the actual quote and source., but User:Capitalismojo removed it[1], saying "remove unrelated neo-nazi material from BLP". This is some extremely funny stuff. Removing part of a quotation mid-sentence because it contains "unrelated neo-nazi material"! And he is backed up by User:Gaijin42 [2]. The patent abuse of WP:BLP policy here is simply boggling. — goethean 21:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So your interpretation of BLP is that the part of a sentence NOT talking about Halbrook is relevant in an article about Halbrook? Gaijin42 (talk) 22:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My interpretation is straight-forward. There's no reason to chop up a quotation — in the middle of a clause! — because you personally dislike the contents of that clause. There's no other reason to remove a few words. The sentence doesn't even make sense now that you've butchered it — one of the dashes is now missing. Let's just excise a few words out of the middle of a clause because we don't like that they discuss our favorite gun control ideologue in connection with a controversial figure. — goethean 22:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The conflation of an unrelated white-power neo-nazi with a prominent attorney in a quote adds nothing to this BLP. The opinion of one professor/lawyer concerning another former professor/lawyer is a barely defensible addition to a BLP without the unrelated junk included. Capitalismojo (talk) 17:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Utter nonsense. There is nothing in the Harcourt material which comes close to violating BLP. Your chopping up a sentence and sticking it back together in an ungrammatical and unreadable way does not improve the article and should be reverted. — goethean 18:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 17:03, 3 January 2014 edit Capitalismojo (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 15,112 edits →Amusing removal of well-sourced material -- midsentence! ← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:05, 3 January 2014 edit undo Goethean (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 40,563 edits →Amusing removal of well-sourced material -- midsentence! Next edit →
Line 12:		Line 12:

	:::The conflation of an unrelated white-power neo-nazi with a prominent attorney in a quote adds nothing to this BLP. The opinion of one professor/lawyer concerning another former professor/lawyer is a barely defensible addition to a BLP without the unrelated junk included. [[User:Capitalismojo\|Capitalismojo]] ([[User talk:Capitalismojo\|talk]]) 17:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)		:::The conflation of an unrelated white-power neo-nazi with a prominent attorney in a quote adds nothing to this BLP. The opinion of one professor/lawyer concerning another former professor/lawyer is a barely defensible addition to a BLP without the unrelated junk included. [[User:Capitalismojo\|Capitalismojo]] ([[User talk:Capitalismojo\|talk]]) 17:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

			::::Utter nonsense. There is nothing in the Harcourt material which comes close to violating BLP. Your chopping up a sentence and sticking it back together in an ungrammatical and unreadable way does not improve the article and should be reverted. — [[User:Goethean\|goethean]] 18:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)