Talk:List of people from the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

Latest comment: 6 years ago by RMCD bot in topic Move discussion in progress

Why? edit

I don't think this article has any importance at all. I request deletion or merging. --An Enormous Laser Beam (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Citations required edit

Taken from the Dagenham article:

From this article:

From Barking:

Every entry must have a citation to be included. See List of people from Leeds for an example of best practice. MRSC (talk) 08:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

New additions edit

  • The Anonymous Nun of Barking - a twelfth-century Anglo-Norman poet who wrote a Life of Edward the Confessor
  • Clemence of Barking - a twelfth-century Anglo-Norman poet who wrote a Life of Saint Catherine
  • Goscelin of Saint-Bertin - eleventh-century historian of Anglo-Saxon saints who worked for the sisters of Barking Abbey

As will all entries to this article these need to be attributable to a reliable published source. MRSC (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

  • Trevor Brooking - 1966 World Cup Winner, brought up in Barking
  • John Terry former England captain and current Chelsea captain

Two more that require references to be included. MRSC (talk) 21:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Section moved from User talk:MRSC edit

Hi. I appreciate your efforts here, but I think it's the wrong approach.

WP:CITE demands citations only for contentious material and/or quotes. I don't think the material you removed from that page is particularly contentious. I dislike edit-warring, so please can you restore it. Thank you. --Dweller (talk) 14:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

References are not optional. MRSC (talk) 18:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Can you please point me to the policy or guideline that insists that uncontroversial material without references should be blanked? You quoted WP:CITE as your reason for blanking, in your edit summary, which specifically, in its opening section, says the very opposite. --Dweller (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
WP:GRAPEVINE: "Remove any unsourced material to which an editor objects in good faith".   Racconish Tk 22:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
I don't see that text in WP:GRAPEVINE. But by citing that, you make my point. It actually reads, "Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced." This is not contentious material. --Dweller (talk) 22:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
I would tend to remove entries like that per WP:BURDEN: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed. How quickly this should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article." Although I would generally add a {{fact}} tag and leave for a couple of days to give the original editor to add the ref. After that, if they can't be bothered, delete at will.Lozleader (talk) 23:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Oh I just noticed that these entries are in the list at Talk:List of people from Barking and Dagenham, where it can clearly be seen what needs reffing. That looks like a better approach than putting stuff on the main page.Lozleader (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, per WP:BURDEN, how does saying that someone was born in one borough, rather than (perhaps) another, "damage the reputation of living persons"? No-one is accusing these people of smoking crack cocaine. This is an inappropriate sledgehammer approach, using BLP as an excuse. --Dweller (talk) 06:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks everyone for dealing with this. MRSC (talk) 06:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

However, if you would like to discuss policy further please do so on the appropriate policy discussion page, not here. MRSC (talk) 07:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think the guideline and policy alphabetty spaghetti that has been thrown around here (three so far - any more to come?) are all clear. I don't have a problem with the policies. It's your interpretation of them that's bothering me. --Dweller (talk) 07:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
--- end of section copied from user talk

Question edit

Does anyone seriously and in good faith suggest that including living people, without references, in a list of people from Barking and Dagenham is "contentious material" or could "damage the reputation of living persons"? --Dweller (talk) 12:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress edit

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Grade I and II* listed buildings in Bexley which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply