User talk:Trinity2022
Adding content with original research and sources that do not mention the subject of the article
[edit]
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:47, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Considering that an official court document of New Zealand was used as reference, I am unsure how that constitutes unreferenced or poorly referenced information! The information may cause controversy to the subject, however it is fact-based and in my opinion, as a fact-based piece of information, it should not be immediately discarded as controversial or defamatory. Trinity2022 (talk) 05:17, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Extraordinary claims require exceptional sourcing. Wikipedia requires a higher standard of sourcing for BLPs, especially if the issue MAY be considered controversial or defamatory. BusterD (talk) 06:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- What would qualify as exceptional sourcing if not official court documents? Trinity2022 (talk) 07:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for engaging on this. First, per WP:Biographies of living persons policy, any controversial or defamatory claim may be removed by any user with no warning if there's insufficient sourcing. Per Bold, Revert, Discuss, you've edited boldly, this has been reverted, now we're discussing. (So again, my thanks.) The standard is at WP:Reliable sources. For any controversial claim on a living person's article, I'd expect to see multiple reliable secondary sources independent of the subject directly detailing. A primary source (like a filing or other legal document) should rarely be used on a BLP without corroborating secondary reliable sources to give perspective and evaluation. My expectation is there would be some coverage of the situation by periodicals or websites which meet the RS standard. BusterD (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- What would qualify as exceptional sourcing if not official court documents? Trinity2022 (talk) 07:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Extraordinary claims require exceptional sourcing. Wikipedia requires a higher standard of sourcing for BLPs, especially if the issue MAY be considered controversial or defamatory. BusterD (talk) 06:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]
Hello, Trinity2022, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
- Your first article
- Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
- Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
- and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! BusterD (talk) 07:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)