457:; I had the same thing happen! I would appreciate a mention as part of the policy as I would not have considered this as making BLPPROD ineligible. To my understanding, authority control isn't exactly supposed to be a reference, more of a unique identifier. I guess because it is added on Wikidata and not Knowledge (XXG) (never purposefully linked) I figured it wouldn't apply. However, if there is consensus, I propose specifying "adding article contains no sources in any form (as references, external links,
286:
268:
428:, thanks so much. I get it now—the links to bibliographic catalogues referenced statements in the entry. Yeah hrm any reference really means anything, but I’m not sure I’d add authority control to the instructions explicitly because so many biographies have AC wiki text as a matter of course, but it doesn’t pull up anything like that (because the person is, I don’t know, a notable surfer). Just one opinion tho—it’s a good question.
935:
237:
206:
680:
781:. These sentences add a lot more subjectivity to this process than I thought. Now patrollers and admins need to decide not only if the article has sources and external links, but if those sources support certain statements. (What statements, by the way? If a BLP has no controversial statements, does it not then need sources?)
830:
a source backing up information in the article. There may be better ways to cite the facts in the article than a generic link to a stats page, but the bar to prevent BLPPROD from being used is deliberately set at a low level to prevent it from being used merely because the nominator doesn't like how
810:
Hi All. I've been struggling to understand the reason external links prevent an article from being BLPPROD'd. There's many many sports articles, for example, that are have no references at all, and all they have are external links to stats pages. There's no references to indicate any notability,
615:
about, but it appears to be exclusively(?) about biographies that have no sources. Right? I've tried to read through big chunks of the article, to see if maybe that's only part of what it's about, i.e. that it says 'if the biography of a living person is unsourced, do this'... 'if it is sourced, do
485:
I get that. The only issue I have with authority control being used in this manner is that it pulls the sources from
Wikidata. If the Wikidata page is changed and the identifiers are modified or removed, there would be no changelog on Knowledge (XXG). Theoretically those links could one day be gone
894:
Depends on the circumstances really. Dead sources might be OK if they are still accessible somehow, such as in an internet archive or if the source was also published somewhere. A source which doesn't support any statement in the article doesn't count for the purposes of BLP PROD, but this will be
27:
A perennial discussion at this page relates to the dichotomy of having two different sourcing tests - any source however poor prevents an article having the tag applied but only a reliable source can justify the removal of a valid tag. Anyone contemplating re-opening this debate is recommended to
526:
Well as far as I can tell the BLPPROD policy has no explicit mention of authority control, which is why I restarted this discussion. I'm not sure how else to propose a change. I understand that BLPPROD is not the only solution, it's just in my mind there is just a disconnect between sources from
871:
My experience with trying to use BLPPROD in the past is that at least some admins will decline it for the smallest of things. For example, one citation of any kind, one external link of any kind, or one authority control link of any kind. Which is weird, because this seems to disagree with the
504:
You are right the source code does not have any sources but the article does, thae article is what matters to this policy. The best way to handle this is to try to add a reliable source. If that isn't what you want to do or you can't find any reliable sources, there are always other options,
475:
I don't just say there are links in the authority control therefore it is ineligible for BLPPROD. I actually click links and verify that something on the page that pulls up verifies some information in the article. BLPPROD is not about references. It is about having a source in any form. An
74:
784:
Seems complicated. What's the actual practice for BLPPROD? Does any source disqualify? Or can you use BLPPROD on an article that is refbomb'd with irrelevant sources? I'm tempted to delete the two quotes above, but am checking here first. Thanks.
165:
193:
189:
185:
181:
177:
173:
169:
45:
41:
37:
33:
29:
851:
If an article has two sources, one dead and another not relevant, is it eligible for BLPPROD? BLPPROD states an article is eligible if it "contains no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise)
298:
489:
Although you are correct in that the published
Knowledge (XXG) page shows these sources, the page sourcecode only shows and nothing else. In this sense, the article contains no sources in any form. Just a thought.
293:
273:
744:
If at least one non-trivial statement can be cited to any of the primary sources, then you can't use BLPPROD. Either way, editors could easily disagree on every stage of that test, so you're better off using
562:. If anyone thinks authority control should be excluded we would need to get a consensus and then write that exclusion into the policy. Until then, it is a source that makes it ineligible for BLPPROD.
476:
external link to the person's website is a source, a link in the authority control template is a source. If any source verifies any piece of information in the article it is not eligible for BLPPROD.
608:
59:
856:" How should we read this? An article is eligible if it contains no sources in any form or an article is eligible if it contains no sources in any form supporting statements made at the BLP?
297:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of biographies of living persons on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
692:
616:
this'... but, it's really only about unsourced articles, isn't it? I don't even think it has a clear link to another article that explains how to nominate such articles if they
611:) has an inaccurate, and therefore confusing title. The title is far more general than what the article actually describes. I'm so confused that I can barely summarize what it
361:
Hello. Had one of my BLPPRODs rejected today because there was an authority control present. Should I add mention of this to the policy, for increased clarity? Thank you. –
197:
895:
interpreted broadly, e.g. if your article says "X is an
American actor..." and your source supports the statement that X is an actor then the article isn't unsourced.
385:, sorry this reply is so belated but do you mind linking to the entry in question? That’s a novel interpretation so far as I’m aware but maybe I’m missing something.
109:
643:
procedure although it has different rules. Yes, this is only about unsourced articles. Sourced articles are still subject to our other deletion procedures:
331:
115:
773:
I always though that a source of any kind disqualifies an article from BLPPROD, but today someone pointed out some of these statements to me: 1)
688:
672:
779:
biographies that do not contain at least one source directly supporting the material may also be proposed for deletion under this process
572:
554:
The policy says any source in any form makes it ineligible. The form of the sources we are talking about here in the source code is
542:
706:
621:
919:
905:
887:
865:
840:
820:
800:
762:
738:
711:
664:
629:
584:
566:
549:
541:
The article is what a reader would see, not the source code behind the article. The best place to discuss changes to any policy is
536:
521:
499:
480:
470:
437:
420:
394:
376:
55:
811:
or any references that backup any information in the article. I'm curious why external links block the application of BLPPROD?
104:
486:
and the
Knowledge (XXG) history would have no record of what was there previously. I think this is important in a BLP context.
248:
220:
95:
722:
557:
205:
160:
216:
926:
254:
146:
882:
795:
415:
371:
349:
517:. If you believe that authority control shouldn't be used in this manner, propose a change to the policy.
915:
861:
734:
660:
433:
390:
85:
701:
625:
343:
939:
872:
BLPPROD template itself, whose wording seems a bit stricter than that. But such is
Knowledge (XXG)... –
730:
125:
100:
655:. Maybe someone with a bit more time and motivation than I have can clarify this on the project page.
695:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
636:
816:
285:
267:
873:
786:
446:
425:
406:
382:
362:
221:
17:
527:
Knowledge (XXG) and those from
Wikidata. I suppose in a way the source code is the article, no?
911:
857:
656:
450:
429:
399:
386:
337:
81:
826:
An external link to a stats page that verifies at least one of the statistics in the article
746:
648:
640:
510:
696:
580:
563:
546:
532:
518:
495:
477:
466:
218:
750:
652:
644:
514:
506:
836:
812:
758:
726:
635:
Yes the title is a bit confusing. That's really for historical reasons that led to the
775:
contains no sources supporting any statements made about the person in the biography
898:
576:
528:
491:
462:
454:
832:
754:
721:
Does this apply to BLP's that are only sourced to primary sources, such as
679:
684:
307:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons
910:
A source that is no longer available online is still a valid source.
573:
Knowledge (XXG):Village_pump_(policy)#BLPPROD_and_Authority_Control
693:
Knowledge (XXG):Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 30#BLPprod
609:
Knowledge (XXG):Proposed deletion of biographies of living people
854:
supporting any statements made about the person in the biography
683:
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
310:
Template:WikiProject
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons
230:
222:
50:
403:
140:
133:
294:
940:
Knowledge (XXG):Teahouse § Aidan White (journalist)
313:
571:Thanks for the link. I've started a discussion at
60:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people
247:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
639:procedure being tacked on to the pre-existing
8:
332:Category:BLP articles proposed for deletion
304:Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons
274:Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons
262:
264:
778:
774:
543:Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (policy)
7:
236:
234:
253:It is of interest to the following
58:for discussing improvements to the
28:first read prior threads such as:
25:
291:This page is within the scope of
80:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:BLP PROD TPL
933:
691:. This discussion will occur at
678:
284:
266:
235:
204:
75:Click here to start a new topic.
575:if you'd like to participate!
1:
801:06:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
763:16:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
739:16:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
459:authority control identifiers
301:and see a list of open tasks.
72:Put new text under old text.
649:deletion without discussion
956:
931:
920:20:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
906:18:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
888:12:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
866:11:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
665:10:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
377:19:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
123:
26:
712:20:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
630:09:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
279:
261:
110:Be welcoming to newcomers
927:Aidan White (journalist)
673:Redirects for discussion
645:deletion with discussion
585:19:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
567:18:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
550:18:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
537:18:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
522:18:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
500:16:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
481:16:33, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
471:15:37, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
841:10:46, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
821:03:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
687:and has thus listed it
603:Confusing article title
438:14:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
421:12:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
395:07:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
350:Template:ProdwarningBLP
831:something is sourced.
105:avoid personal attacks
753:for all these cases.
344:Template:Prod blp/doc
198:Auto-archiving period
671:"BLPprod" listed at
607:This project page (
461:, etc.)" Thoughts?
249:content assessment
116:dispute resolution
77:
886:
799:
558:authority control
419:
375:
357:Authority control
338:Template:Prod blp
329:
328:
325:
324:
321:
320:
229:
228:
96:Assume good faith
73:
16:(Redirected from
947:
937:
936:
901:
880:
878:
793:
791:
709:
704:
699:
682:
561:
413:
411:
369:
367:
315:
314:
311:
308:
305:
288:
281:
280:
270:
263:
240:
239:
238:
231:
223:
209:
208:
199:
143:
136:
51:
21:
955:
954:
950:
949:
948:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
934:
930:
899:
874:
849:
808:
787:
771:
719:
707:
702:
697:
676:
653:speedy deletion
605:
555:
407:
363:
359:
352:
312:
309:
306:
303:
302:
225:
224:
219:
196:
154:
153:
152:
151:
139:
134:WT:BLP PROD TPL
132:
128:
121:
91:
49:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
953:
951:
932:
929:
924:
923:
922:
908:
891:
890:
848:
845:
844:
843:
807:
806:External Links
804:
770:
769:Simplification
767:
766:
765:
718:
715:
689:for discussion
675:
669:
668:
667:
604:
601:
600:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
587:
552:
487:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
358:
355:
330:
327:
326:
323:
322:
319:
318:
316:
299:the discussion
289:
277:
276:
271:
259:
258:
252:
241:
227:
226:
217:
215:
214:
211:
210:
156:
155:
150:
149:
144:
137:
129:
124:
122:
120:
119:
112:
107:
98:
92:
90:
89:
78:
69:
68:
65:
64:
63:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
952:
941:
928:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
907:
904:
903:
902:
893:
892:
889:
884:
879:
877:
876:Novem Linguae
870:
869:
868:
867:
863:
859:
855:
846:
842:
838:
834:
829:
825:
824:
823:
822:
818:
814:
805:
803:
802:
797:
792:
790:
789:Novem Linguae
782:
780:
776:
768:
764:
760:
756:
752:
748:
743:
742:
741:
740:
736:
732:
728:
724:
717:Applicability
716:
714:
713:
710:
705:
700:
694:
690:
686:
681:
674:
670:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
634:
633:
632:
631:
627:
623:
619:
614:
610:
602:
586:
582:
578:
574:
570:
569:
568:
565:
559:
553:
551:
548:
544:
540:
539:
538:
534:
530:
525:
524:
523:
520:
516:
512:
508:
503:
502:
501:
497:
493:
488:
484:
483:
482:
479:
474:
473:
472:
468:
464:
460:
456:
452:
448:
447:Novem Linguae
445:
439:
435:
431:
427:
426:Novem Linguae
424:
423:
422:
417:
412:
410:
409:Novem Linguae
404:
401:
398:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
383:Novem Linguae
381:
380:
379:
378:
373:
368:
366:
365:Novem Linguae
356:
354:
351:
348:
345:
342:
339:
336:
333:
317:
300:
296:
295:
290:
287:
283:
282:
278:
275:
272:
269:
265:
260:
256:
250:
246:
242:
233:
232:
213:
212:
207:
203:
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
162:
158:
157:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
131:
130:
127:
117:
113:
111:
108:
106:
102:
99:
97:
94:
93:
87:
83:
82:Learn to edit
79:
76:
71:
70:
67:
66:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
43:
39:
35:
31:
19:
912:Phil Bridger
897:
896:
875:
858:AusLondonder
853:
850:
827:
809:
788:
783:
772:
731:BilledMammal
720:
677:
657:Phil Bridger
617:
612:
606:
458:
451:Innisfree987
430:Innisfree987
408:
400:Innisfree987
387:Innisfree987
364:
360:
353:
346:
340:
334:
292:
255:WikiProjects
245:project page
244:
201:
159:
54:This is the
622:77.162.8.57
620:sourced. --
637:WP:BLPPROD
141:WT:BLPPROD
938:Moved to
813:Mr.weedle
147:WT:STICKY
126:Shortcuts
118:if needed
101:Be polite
56:talk page
847:Question
727:this one
723:this one
564:~ GB fan
547:~ GB fan
519:~ GB fan
478:~ GB fan
161:Archives
86:get help
900:Hut 8.5
747:WP:PROD
703:Adesdae
685:BLPprod
641:WP:PROD
511:WP:PROD
202:90 days
751:WP:AFD
577:Mbdfar
529:Mbdfar
515:WP:AFD
507:WP:CSD
492:Mbdfar
463:Mbdfar
455:GB fan
251:scale.
777:, 2)
243:This
166:Index
114:Seek
62:page.
916:talk
883:talk
862:talk
837:Chat
833:Iffy
817:talk
796:talk
759:Chat
755:Iffy
735:talk
725:and
661:talk
651:and
626:talk
581:talk
533:talk
513:and
496:talk
467:talk
434:talk
416:talk
391:talk
372:talk
103:and
839:--
761:--
749:or
708:378
618:are
545:.
405:. –
918:)
864:)
828:is
819:)
737:)
729:?
663:)
647:,
628:)
613:is
583:)
560:}}
556:{{
535:)
509:,
498:)
469:)
453:,
449:,
436:)
402:,
393:)
200::
192:,
188:,
184:,
180:,
176:,
172:,
168:,
84:;
44:,
40:,
36:,
32:,
914:(
885:)
881:(
860:(
835:★
815:(
798:)
794:(
785:–
757:★
733:(
698:F
659:(
624:(
579:(
531:(
494:(
465:(
432:(
418:)
414:(
389:(
374:)
370:(
347:·
341:·
335:·
257::
194:7
190:6
186:5
182:4
178:3
174:2
170:1
163::
88:.
48:,
46:5
42:4
38:3
34:2
30:1
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
