Talk:Ewan Crawford

BLP violations

We have a hobbyist here, someone interested in Tasmanian stamps and this judge, who keeps inserting what I consider to be a BLP violation--a rambling paragraph (without secondary sources) about murder meant, I think, to cast doubt on this judge. Hard to tell--it's not well-written. I have removed those from the history and will apply long-term semi-protection to this article to prevent this disruption. See these contributions, and these, and a recent set of two, this and this. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

• I see now that that's what they were doing on Postage stamps and postal history of Tasmania as well (and that was even more riddled with errors, with an even worse BLP violation). Philafrenzy, you created that article and may have an interest in it; BlackJack, you reverted that editor and may like to keep an eye out as well. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to it. It is on my watchlist. I am not an admin however, and so can only guess at the content. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Haha, that's exactly the point, Philafrenzy. :) It concerns a murder, which the IP claimed is somehow a notable case in the judge's career, but the IP didn't manage to insert the content properly, either grammatically or in terms of secondary sources, or in agreement with the BLP. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Drmies. Will watch out for any more violations but it should be okay now with the protections. Jack | ^{talk page} 19:06, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. Drmies (talk) 00:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)