Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

Click here to post a question to the Biographies of living persons noticeboard

Question regards offensive language about a minority group on a BLP talk page

If someone is being purposely offensive about a minority on the talk page of someone who is not in that minority what is the best approach. ~ BOD ~ ^TALK 21:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but your question is too vague, thus the only real answer I can give you is, it depends... What is "offensive" can be highly subjective, so it's helpful to see it in context. As a very general matter, I find when something offends me, it's helpful to look deep inside and find out exactly why. I find when I can answer that question, the words, actions, appearances, or whatever, have lost their power over me.

If it's a problem user, then the place to take it would be ANI, to request some admin intervention. That or ARBCOM are your best options, depending upon the nature of the problem, but my advice is: be very specific about the problem. Beyond that, I can't be anymore specific than your question allows. Zaereth (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:BLPN shortcut

I notice WP:BLPN directs to the article, but the shortcut doesn't seem to appear on the page. Can someone add it, or is there some reason it isn't displayed? Thanks. –Roy McCoy (talk) 17:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

How important is religion in sports?

Is "first Muslim" in a sporting event a thing? I don't see that for other religions. Even Template:Infobox person removed the religion parameter from it. Please discuss at Talk:Khabib Nurmagomedov#First Muslim to win UFC title. Share your views.--2409:4073:2003:DE2E:A18B:FF00:1A4D:9E8 (talk) 08:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

First of all, I note that you posted identical sections here and at RSN -- and while I don't think you did so for any improper reason, it's sort of bad form. In the future, better to pick the board you think most applicable. As to your substantive issue, for me, this is an easy one: it's a thing if the reliable sources tell us it's a thing. If the fact receives a lot of coverage, then it should definitely be a part of the article. If it receives very little or none, it likely shouldn't. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It's RFN. You cannot dump anything into Wikipedia just because it got coverage, WP:ONUS.--2409:4073:219A:CB25:E5F4:5235:6CD4:B0E1 (talk) 09:23, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

It's one line, not exactly an entire section - and I would say it's notable enough to be included. The UFC is American, as far as I understand - a country where roughly 65% of the population is Christian. Now, if he were the first Christian to win that sporting event, I don't think it would be particularly notable, given the demographics of America, though a line or two about his faith should be included in a section like "Personal life"; however, in a competition held in a country sometimes hostile to Islam, where far fewer people are Muslim than Christian, it seems important to note, especially since a quick search shows that his faith was something he spoke of in interviews, and has been covered by sources as important in the context of an American wrestling federation. -- Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 11:10, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Problems with a BLP

I just wanted to alert someone to a BLP that looks like a problem to me. It gives a DOB that I can't verify. Normally, I'd just remove the information, however, the name of the article includes the DOB as well: Chuck Taylor (journalist, born 1957 I'm a newbie here and I don't know how someone renames a page, but I thought someone should be alerted to the issue. The article is a stub, and in my opinion, shouldn't even be here. There really isn't anything that I consider notable; I'd nominate it for deletion, but the last time I nominated an article for deletion, I apparently missed a "step" in the nomination process, (it was deleted) so I'm not sure that I want to go that route again. Mollifiednow (talk) 13:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for not properly formatting a link to the BLP, hopefully, this works

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Taylor_(journalist,_born_1957) Mollifiednow (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Mollifiednow, this is the talk page for the noticeboard, not the noticeboard itself, where you probably should have posted this. Anthony Appleyard is the one who moved the page to the current name after a request from an IP. Per WP:BLPPRIVACY, it's okay to leave in the year but better to leave out the rest, unless we have a high quality source for it. I just made that change. Gbear605 (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Sorry I used the wrong page. Have a great day! Mollifiednow (talk) 14:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

ECP and ARBPIA

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles#ARBPIA General Sanctions explicitly forbids IPs and non-ECP editors from participating in "internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, noticeboard discussions, etc." Maybe this should be noted at the top of the page? Doug Weller talk 08:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Doug Weller, This is a crazy piece of protection that can cause real problems. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help (which is linked directly off the main "help" page) says to use the Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard as an appropriate venue for complaints about an article on yourself. Indeed, the top of this page says "don't post your query here, click here to add a question". These people are what I call "distress purchase" editors; they aren't interested in editing Wikipedia or learning policy, they've just seen something that upset them and want to fix it. Locking these people out of an important venue for this with a message "Arbitration Enforcement" (which means nothing to these people) is completely counter-productive. Please could you reverse this protection as soon as possible. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:10, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I reversed myself shortly after doing it and changed my post here and the topic heading. However, a DS talk page notice identifying what sort of topic cannot be discussed by non-ECP editors or IPs is required. Most complaints here aren't by article subjects and I would guess that few of those are relevant to the ARBPIA area. Doug Weller talk 11:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Very few cases here are relevant to ARBPIA. I think they can be handled on a case-by-case basis without putting big confusing edit warnings everywhere or, worse, locking out the very subjects of problematic BLPs who need to have access here. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Mentioning editors when discussing them on this noticeboard

This conversation reminds me, should we have a rule, like WP:NPOVN does with Template:NPOVN-notice and ANI likewise, that when bringing up a particular editor's conduct on this board one is required to notify them? Otherwise I think such conversations, such as the one linked, can happen if the editor isn't notified and it becomes problematic. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 07:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes. There's no reason not to. I mean, there are reasons why some people don't do it but none of them are GOOD reasons. And failing to ping relevant parties, since it's a violation of common courtesy, pretty much assures that the resulting discussion will start acrimoniously. Volunteer Marek 07:15, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 December 2020

Sources for McEwan's return to the Morning Show on CBS are both dead links. 198.108.140.10 (talk) 13:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)