Talk:Bryson Gray

WP:ABOUTSELF
WP:ABOUTSELF is about self-descriptions of a source. It is absolutely not about a deprecated source writing about a living person. The Sun is not describing The Sun here. WP:THESUN is a deprecated source and should not be used. If we only have a deprecated source for a biographical fact, we don't have a source. Please stop deliberately reinserting a deprecated source into a WP:BLP. I urge you to self-revert here - David Gerard (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)


 * If another editor reverts, I'm obviously not going to reintroduce the material. Where Bryson is from seems rather uncontroversial, and the usage of The Sun isn't explicitly disallowed; its only discouraged. I don't see a reason to exclude it here. It seems his place of birth is fairly well-documented, is there not another source we could use? Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)


 * the usage of The Sun isn't explicitly disallowed; its only discouraged Deprecated sources are almost unusable on BLPs. Again, I urge you to self-revert - you are greatly misunderstanding deprecation,WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:BLP. If there's another source, use that - and not a trash-tier source like The Sun - David Gerard (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with the trash-tier rating of The Sun; however, if we read the discussion deprecating that source, it's pretty clear that we should look for another source to cover this fairly uncontroversial fact rather than just outright excluding it. I'm not opposed to changing it since I know you don't want to run afoul of the 3RR, so if anyone has suggestions, I am willing to self-revert to the new source. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:14, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * This violates WP:BURDEN: The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. Emphasis in original - that's you. You admit you don't have a non-deprecated source for the material you added and re-added. We don't leave it sitting there just because you re-added something you can't back up - David Gerard (talk) 16:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I've already stated that I don't see a strong reason to not include the uncontroversial material simply based on the objectionable nature of the source, which seems to be supported by the Noticeboard discussion. We are at an impasse, however, that can easily be solved by another editor reverting or by the introduction of a new source. Neither of which I am opposed to. Kcmastrpc (talk) 18:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You propose to resolve it by WP:LOCALCONSENSUS - but this cannot be used against a broad general RFC, such as that which deprecated The Sun. If you really want to use the Sun here, you would probably need to take it to WP:RSN and ask about using The Sun on a BLP - David Gerard (talk) 20:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * An unwillingness to test your idiosyncratic understanding of WP:ABOUTSELF does your position no favours. ABOUTSELF is for statements about the source, not the topic: Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field, so long as: ... 2. it does not involve claims about third parties; ABOUTSELF here would apply to The Sun, and explicitly not to statements in The Sun about someone else. This is not a statement about The Sun, so the claim of ABOUTSELF is spurious. Competence is required - David Gerard (talk) 11:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)