Talk:Michelle Yesudas

Wikipedia worthy

Not sure if she qualifies for Wikipedia. The claim is founder of (or one of) Lawyers of Liberty but is not mentioned in that entry.--AhmedFaizP (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Unrelated links/refs

@Atlantic306: I notice you've been reverting a number of links back in; but at the moment, it looks like the IP address is correct, and those are relevant, which is why I declined your protection request. Why do you keep replacing these? Vanamonde (talk) 05:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, the ip is also adding that the subject is a satanist instead of a christian, will discuss moving links to talkpage , when possible, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atlantic306 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh. Um. Missed that, somehow: but a blanket revert was still not appropriate. You should have reverted the category, and reported the IP for disruptive editing to AIV. Still: @BU Rob13: I don't know if you saw this either, but it seems like you were right and I was wrong. I'm wondering now if some BLP revdels are appropriate. Vanamonde (talk) 17:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Believe I saw it the first time around but forgot about it when you asked me to reconsider. Definitely didn't see it the second time around. It's borderline for revision deletion. I tend to be "stingy" with revdel because I've heard that the functionaries and arbitrators currently aren't fans of how admins tend to throw it around easily. I wouldn't object if you revdel'd it. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:39, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: I'm undecided, too. I wasn't aware of dissatisfaction among the functionaries (could you point me to that, if you're able?) but this isn't a terribly serious case...although how seriously a person takes it probably depends on their background. On the balance I think I'll remove it because "better safe than sorry". Vanamonde (talk) 17:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

It was expressed to me off-wiki, Vanamonde93, so I'm unable to point to anything. I heard it from a single functionary, who was not speaking "officially" for the functionary group or the Committee, but they said it was a view that was held by many in that group. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 13 April 2017

Sources should be tidied and trimmed. Too many unused sources in the article. 2001:E68:5436:D62:DD03:192A:4CA2:B50E (talk) 06:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

 Not done request does not include a complete and specific description of the request, so that an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:40, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Deleted content

Adding the following content deleted from the article for consideration:

Others facing sedition charges vow to fight on - The Star Online, Nation - http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2015/10/07/others-facing-sedition-charges-vow-to-fight-on/

Gender equality - everyone should speak up - The Star Online, In Your Face, Tan Yi Liang - http://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/online-exclusive/in-your-face/2015/11/04/all-genders-should-work-together/

Cop accused of rape threat still on duty pending probe - The Star Online, Nation, Nicholas Cheng - http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2015/05/20/crime-cop-rape-on-duty-investigation/

Selangor MB crisis: Lawyers for Liberty asks of Bon's role as human rights advocate - The Star Online, Nation, Tan Yi Liang - http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2014/08/15/selangor-mb-crisis-lawyers-at-liberty-reply-edmund-bon/

No dressing down rape issue, say netizens - The Star Online, Nation, Michelle Tam - http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2013/07/11/no-dressing-down-rape-issue/

• Y'know, instead of edit-warring to keep external links in the article, you could incorporate the content in these references, and make the entire argument moot. Vanamonde (talk) 05:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)