Talk:Active 20-30 Club

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Active 20-30 Club article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sexual misconduct section

@2601:645:401:5fd0:a982:b4ee:c8e2:ba78: I am opening this section so that you can explain your rationale in repeatedly removing the sexual misconduct section. The information seems to be well sourced and the only rationale you have provided (in your edit summaries) is that the information is "never proven, vetted, and completely one sided". Wikipedia does not need information to be "proven or vetted" (whatever that means), only that it has been published in a reliable source. As for "one sided", if you have reliable sources that present another side to this story, you are welcome to add that information along with the references to the sources. But you cannot simply remove sourced information without a policy-based rationale. CodeTalker (talk) 18:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This section was removed again on 14 February 2022, I'm readding it. LeslieCarr (talk) 21:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was removed again 8 November 2022, I reverted today. Earlier I had tried to edit the description of the event a bit to match the San Francisco Chronicle articles, and we can discuss appropriate weight it should receive, but at the moment I don't see the case for removing the sourced content. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 06:19, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]