Talk:Lucy DeCoutere

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 December 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Canada: Alberta Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.

Australia: Queensland Low‑importance

	Australia portal Lucy DeCoutere is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

BLP note[edit]

A reminder to all editors that Wikipedia is not a forum for expressing editors' personal opinions about our article topics. It is up to the trial judge to decide whether DeCoutere's testimony is credible or not, and whether the "love letter" issue discredits her or not — Wikipedia is not a forum for you to make your own pronouncements on that one way or the other. Our article must comply with WP:BLP, and we are not at liberty to make our own presumptions about who's telling the truth and who's lying in a matter that is still before the courts.

This is not a matter of "protecting" DeCoutere or "attacking" Ghomeshi, either — I don't know either of them personally, I'm quite sure that none of the other editors who've removed the content from the article know either of them personally either — and none of us knows for sure what did or didn't happen, or why. It is the up to the trial judge to determine guilt or innocence; it is not up to Wikipedia to express our own judgements or opinions on the matter. Wait for the judge's ruling; Wikipedia is not a venue for anybody else's opinions, in either direction, in the meantime. Bearcat (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-neutral editing on page[edit]

Tamuren has been selectively adding quotes and content that is designed to attack DeCoutere. Much of what has been added is irrelevant to the page and a clear example of WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. Someone is going to have to clean up this page, it's in poor shape right now. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate FuriouslySerene's concerns about potential WP:TENDENTIOUS editing, I disagree that content has been selectively added and designed to attack DeCoutere. There was a lack of information describing the high-profile court case that users will appreciate being included. Tamuren (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most of it should just go in the R. v. Ghomeshi, 2016 ONCJ 155 article, this article is supposed to be a biography of DeCoutere, not about the case. — Strongjam (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think users will appreciate the blatantly false things you've been adding to this article, such as this line: "The court stated DeCoutere "... co-ordinated a covert network of women who have spent the last seven months sharing their assault stories with each other". No such line exists in the decision. It seems obvious to me you have some axe to grind with DeCoutere and are trying to add negative information about her here, as opposed to building an encyclopedia. FuriouslySerene (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection[edit]

I've added full protection for three days because of the reverting. I did that out of respect for the fact that this is a content dispute, rather than adding semi-protection to lock out AnotherPerson16, but the issue does seem to be SPAs or IPs arriving to add negative material.

The additions are correctly sourced, but there are other issues to consider, such as WP:DUE and WP:BLP, and whether the material belongs instead in the article about the trial, R. v. Ghomeshi, 2016 ONCJ 155. Those issues are best discussed carefully with experienced editors, rather than being the subject of an edit war. SarahSV ^(talk) 15:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]