217:
details get reported in a reputable news source. (And even then we need to be circumspect, to respect the bandmembers' rights; we may need to couch the wording carefully, so that it's clear that we are reporting what the agency said, not the "real truth" - because we do not have access to the real truth of what happened.) If you'd like to add more detail here, I'd say your best bet is to look around in punk and alternative news outlets to see if it's been picked up; maybe
196:- and the sources we find are generally most reliable are ones that have some sort of oversight or peer review, such as academic journal articles and major newspaper or magazine outlets. But because Trask, and everyone in the band, is a living person, we have very strict rules about what can be posted and how it needs to be sourced. These rules aren't always followed, but they are
23:
203:
Essentially, the
Facebook post you linked to accuses Trask of a crime. It puts him in a negative light and could be harmful to his personal, and especially his professional, life. That means he could sue Knowledge if the allegations are shown to be false (which is possible; it may be that the band is
216:
Your actions here could have legal repercussions for
Knowledge; it's important to remember this as you edit contentious material. All we can say without stepping into legally murky territory, and without violating Knowledge's policies, is that Trask is no longer in the band - unless and until the
94:
from
Knowledge. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the
208:
him, or it could be some sort of legitimate misunderstanding). But even if they are true, they have to be verified by some sort of outside source - some news outlet or press agency which has investigated the claims, or by the decision of a court of law. According to the
164:
page, which I've never edited nor deleted. Did you mean to leave that note for someone else? I'm not unhappy — I want to help you, but it's simply that until I know what's going on, I can't do anything.
122:
explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under
Knowledge guidelines.
91:
157:
127:
31:
35:
213:
policy, these kinds of accusations have to be removed immediately from a page if they are not properly sourced.
106:
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add
192:
policy makes it even more urgent. To verify that something like this happened, we try and verify it using
99:, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please
43:
100:
119:
233:
118:
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on
160:
nor your deleted contributions (which you can't see unless you're an administrator) are on the
218:
170:
39:
87:
80:
27:
26:
Welcome to
Knowledge and thank you for your contributions. An article you recently created,
143:
111:
200:
important when something like the allegation you've added to the page comes into play.
139:
135:
229:
222:
210:
189:
131:
126:
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria
96:
193:
166:
142:. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
47:
185:
205:
161:
22:
237:
174:
146:
73:
68:
184:
So, the main issue here has to do with
Knowledge's policy on
101:
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable
42:
for any tests you may want to do and please read our
46:to learn more about contributing. Thank you.
8:
38:(if it hasn't been already). Please use the
30:, may not conform to some of Knowledge's
34:for new articles, so it will shortly be
188:, but for this specific problem, the
7:
14:
21:
228:Thanks for asking, by the way.
1:
238:03:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
190:Biographies of Living Persons
97:criteria for speedy deletion
156:I'm very confused: neither
253:
175:02:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
147:03:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
86:A tag has been placed on
74:01:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
225:have reported on this.
90:, requesting that it be
180:Re: Major League (band)
120:the article's talk page
158:your contributions
219:Alternative Press
72:
44:introduction page
244:
194:reliable sources
117:
116:
110:
92:speedily deleted
66:
63:
61:
59:
57:
25:
252:
251:
247:
246:
245:
243:
242:
241:
182:
154:
128:for biographies
114:
108:
107:
84:
55:
53:
51:
49:
19:
12:
11:
5:
250:
248:
181:
178:
153:
150:
83:
79:Notability of
77:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
249:
240:
239:
235:
231:
226:
224:
223:Absolute Punk
220:
214:
212:
207:
201:
199:
195:
191:
187:
186:Verifiability
179:
177:
176:
172:
168:
163:
159:
151:
149:
148:
145:
141:
140:for companies
137:
133:
132:for web sites
129:
124:
121:
113:
104:
102:
98:
93:
89:
82:
78:
76:
75:
70:
65:
64:
45:
41:
37:
33:
29:
24:
16:
227:
215:
202:
197:
183:
155:
125:
105:
85:
48:
20:
162:John Daker
152:John Daker
144:Realkyhick
69:Mystytopia
32:guidelines
136:for bands
17:June 2007
230:Chubbles
206:defaming
167:Nyttend
88:News 99
81:News 99
67:(a.k.a
40:sandbox
36:removed
28:News 99
211:WP:BLP
198:really
112:hangon
138:, or
234:talk
171:talk
221:or
103:.
236:)
173:)
134:,
130:,
115:}}
109:{{
232:(
169:(
71:)
62:•
60:e
58:d
56:y
54:l
52:C
50:•
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
