Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions

I think that "article" is a disgusting personal attack that we shouldn't be publishing. It's so far in breach of <s>[[WP:BLP]]</s> [[WP:BLPTALK]] that I really don't know where to begin; "{{tq| Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research".}} The trash-piece fails at least two, if not all three of those separate policies. This is one of the most crass examples of [[trial by media]] I've seen. Fram has no opportunity to defend himself or explain his actions in specific examples, many of which have been stripped of all context and background. A more despicable use of a Spotlight article I can ever remember seeing. The editors should be taken to task quite severely for this. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 11:00, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

* As {{u|Bilorv}} reverted the removal of the BLP violation, I have added them to the case as a party, per the decision of [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel_and_others|Gamaliel and Others]] "{{tq|Restoring what is '''perceived''' to be a BLP violation, '''instead of discussing''' whether it is a BLP violation or not, '''can lead to sanctions'''}}" - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 12:50, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

 

=== Statement by WBladesG ===