Talk:Elaine Parent

Declined speedy deletion-- sourcing is out there-- maybe

It's sad this has been unsourced so long.

These negative BLP's are always a headache, but due diligence requires an attempt be made to source before we rush to delete. Dloh cierekim 22:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since the first Google news hit I looked at was on the other side of the pond and goes into some detail, I think sourcing this is warranted and that tagging for CSD is premature. Notability and -- oh wait, she is not a BLP. Anyway this needs to be gone over at AFD to get more perspectives. Dloh cierekim 22:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She was the subject of a court tv documentary. Dloh cierekim 23:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warning on my talk page

Excuse me, User talk:David in DC why the attack warning on my talk page?

I have made only two minor edits. In the first, I erroneously made the section heading lowercase, then realized that "Parent" was a surname. See edit diff. I am certain that you have the wrong editor. Esowteric+Talk 22:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my apology on your page. Here's a shorter version. I effed up, big time. I'm sorry. Please trout-slap me. David in DC (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed unreferenced information

The following material was removed from the article because it was unsourced.[1] Okip 02:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

@2607:fea8:fe40:7e69:15d4:f7c6:c357:1138, @173.34.131.174. Repeating here what I've said over your two talk pages:

Does the documentary say she was a British citizen or does it just describe her use of a British accent and British vocabulary, as you said? If it's the former, there is cause for altering the article to say "different sources have described her as British and American". If it's the latter, your assessment that that makes her British overriding multiple sources that describe her as American would be a violation of Wikipedia's original research policy. But there's no cause for removing wholesale that she is described as some sources as American. Because they do.

Your edit summary comment that there's "no evidence in those sources" is mistaking how sourcing on Wikipedia works; the whole point of the concept of reliable sources, relying on those sources which have editorial processes, is that we delegate the work of verification to those editorial processes. A newspaper is not required to show you its work at every point. AntiDionysius (talk) 00:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]