Talk:J. Bradford DeLong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles..
Start rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
Low rated as low-importance on the importance scale

[edit] Biographies of living persons

Before adding any contentious material to this article, please read the policy on biographies of living persons carefully. Any controversial material must be attributable to a reliable source.

I have three times removed the same negative comments, which were not directly attributable to a reliable source. Please do not restore this material again unless you can point to a reliable source. (Note that a comment on a blog post is not even a vaguely reliable source.)

Sideshow Bob Roberts 00:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying that a person's own blog is not a reliable source for quoting him, or am I missing something? -- intgr 00:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Of course we can quote DeLong's own words from his blog, but we can't refer to “allegations of insensitivity” etc. unless a reliable source has made (or referred to) these allegations.
The section I removed, which was headed “Allegations of insensitivity toward Asian Americans”, stated that “DeLong's stance has prompted charges of insensitivity toward Asians and their plight in America” and the reference provided was a link to DeLong's blog which did not support this assertion.
The tone of the section suggested that there was some sort of controversy surrounding DeLong's remarks. If this is the case, we should be able to find a reliable source (say, Andrew Sullivan or someone in the mainstream media) who refers to the controversy. If we can't find a source, it's probably either untrue or non-notable.
Sideshow Bob Roberts 13:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The section is back, this time with the heading “Allegations of hostility against Asian Americans”, and now with a new reference linking to a blog post by Andrew Sullivan which makes no mention whatsoever of hostility towards Asian Americans. (Sullivan does accuse DeLong of “nativist hostility”: this clearly refers to DeLong's comment that “Andrew Sullivan is simply and totally clueless about what America is”. Please read your sources more carefully before adding contentious material.)

I may be wrong, but as far as I can tell nobody has ever accused DeLong of “hostility against Asian Americans”. For us to do so is a blatant violation of WP:BLP.

Also, as I said earlier, people who post comments on a blog are not reliable sources, and their negative opinions cannot be quoted in a biography of a living person.

To avoid an edit war, please don't add any more contentious material without discussing it here first. Anything that's not directly attributable to a reliable source will be removed.

Sideshow Bob Roberts 03:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Bob Roberts, as I noted in my edits, several websites have been created just to document DeLong's censorship. However, you didn't delete the references to where he lives and his academic background. And yet no references are provided. I don't doubt the information is correct. However, if your policy is to delete unsubstantiated material, it has to go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.133.192 (talk) 02:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Our policy is to delete "unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons". If you believe the references to where he lives and his academic background are contentious, please delete them.
If a controversy is notable, it will almost certainly have been discussed by a reliable, published source. If you can find a reliable, published source that discusses the controversy, feel free to add it back to the article. If you can't, it has no business in the article — no matter how many angry people have posted blog comments or "created websites to document it". Sideshow Bob Roberts 02:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Bob Roberts, much of the rest of the material you deleted was valuable as well... And it wasn't controversial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.133.192 (talk) 02:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Such as? Sideshow Bob Roberts 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)