Talk:Floyd McKissick Jr.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

United States: North Carolina 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.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

Edit war

Before this degerates into a mad edit war, I recommend you state your case for the addition/removal from this link [[1]] --CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I requested arbitration on this matter from the Arbitration Committee. Hopefully they'll take up this case and settle it. Evets70 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsupported claims

I came across this article via User talk:Materialscientist#You undid changes bt me on Floyd McKissick Jr, Page. I think the claims about McKissick not paying for renovations and about being in favor of the decriminalization of marijuana qualify as contentious per WP:BLPSOURCES and therefore should not be simply tagged with "citation needed" and "by whom". The burden should be on the person(s) wanting to include such information in the article to provide reliable sources in support. I tried looking for sources which might be used, but didn't find any. Perhaps someone else will have better luck, but until then I think it's better to err on the side of caution here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:27, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Professional misconduct charges

I have just removed that section, with this edit.

I think it is WP:UNDUE, it's a relatively minor incident, which only has local-level news coverage from a single source.

I considered this matter before taking action. I asked for input on the BLP Noticeboard, and a user responded;

I would agree that this case is not only undue weight; but really is not notable enough for inclusion. It was only covered locally (and not that in-depth). If it had received expansive coverage in more prestigious media outlets, I would say: yes, include. But under these circumstances; no. Furthermore, the lede does not mention this one specific case; which implies that the subject is not notable on WP for this life event. In addition, the undue weight occurs in mentioning names that are not notable and should not be mentioned in this article; as the case itself is not note worthy. I would support reducing this to a single sentence in Education and Career or removal altogether. IMHO Maineartists (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2017 (UTC) diff (@Maineartists:)[reply]

I agree with the above; I also would not object to an appropriate simple sentence.

If anyone objects, let's discuss it here. Best, 86.20.193.222 (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]