Jump to content

Talk:Amanda Williams (judge)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted because... it contains cited information from a nationally broadcast, Peabody Award winning, radio program known for fair investigative reporting. Libel and defamation include much more that mere negative content. I believe Judge Williams' actions are reported, not editorialized upon. Please distinguish reporting of negative actions (e.g. Judge Williams' sentencing practices - admittedly difficult to portray as positive) from negative editorializing (e.g. someone claiming Judge Williams did something she did not, or that her actions had unproven adverse consequences - something that is NOT currently an issue on this page). "Disparagement" may not be pretty, but it certainly shouldn't be muted due to false claims of legal issues. Thank you.--63.85.45.130 (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

[edit]

This page should not be "speedily deleted" because it does not meet the speedy deletion criteria. As stated on Wiki the criteria for speedy deletion is "a page that serves no purpose but to disparage or threaten its subject or some other entity." Examples of such are legal threats, or an article about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral version in the history to revert to.

The page does not include any threatening material. It does critique the judge. However, it is not unsourced (a requirement for soemthing being speedily deleted simply because of its "tone.") This page is sourced. There are a series of sources including This American Life. If you listen to the referenced broadcast you will see that the broadcast is also sourced.

I am guessing the only reason someone is trying to delete it is that it links to her law school. Something the law school probably does not love. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.85.45.130 (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article failed speedy delete as an attack page because although entirely negative in tone, it does have sources. However, the article gives undue weight to the subject's sentencing policies and needs to be better balanced. I have added an {{NPOV}} tag. User 63.85.45.130, your statement "I am guessing the only reason someone is trying to delete it is..." does not demonstrate good faith on your part. It's never a good idea to claim the ability to read another editor's mind. --CliffC (talk) 01:01, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amanda Williams. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]