Talk:Richard John Taylor
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Tacyarg in topic Neutrality, sources, notability
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Neutrality, sources, notability
editCame across this article looking for something else, not having heard of this person. Did a bit of clean up and looked at the Guardian article, and expanded the paragraph about those accusations. I think overall the Wiki article still doesn't give due weight to the case Hattenstone makes. Other than that paragraph, the Wiki article is poorly sourced with too many primary or unreliable sources, and use of WP:CRYSTAL. I'm wondering though if Taylor is not in fact notable - if you take all the poor sources out is there much left? Given Hattenstone says none of the films have been broadcast. Will tag with sourcing issues and notability. Tacyarg (talk) 21:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)