Talk:Dan Spitz

Untitled
Maybe the Anthrax discography info does not need to be here? Link to it on the Anthrax page, maybe?--BW

Fair use rationale for Image:AnthraxSpreadingTheDisease.jpg
Image:AnthraxSpreadingTheDisease.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Dan Spitz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090512055817/http://www.spitzwatch.com:80/bio/ to http://www.spitzwatch.com/bio
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160818082743/https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-2012-hodinkee-year-end-recap-most-popular-posts to https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-2012-hodinkee-year-end-recap-most-popular-posts

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:19, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Claims of sexual impropriety re #metoo
Greetings, I agree with the removal of the claim regarding the woman's accusations following the #metoo movement; just because the connected editor removed it, doesn't mean we should restore it. Both the sources altPress and metalsucks both point to the same basic claim from a facebook posting which has since been deleted. I don't follow metal and music press. Are altpress and metal sucks reliable sources? Has the story been corroborated anywhere else other than a facebook posting? Did the journalists who wrote those articles actually interview the woman or seek additional details? This seems pretty controversial for it to be so poorly sourced. It's not like we're referring to a fact that is publicly well-known, but sourced from a less than RS. Centerone (talk) 08:09, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The news accounts looked into the now-deleted Facebook entry, so that right there is a bit of investigation. We cannot know whether any reporters called any of the people involved but were turned away. I don't think it's controversial activity as it takes place on a band bus; it's fairly normal in the rock touring world to assume that a teenage girl on a band bus is open to sex. There must be hundreds of stories like this one going unreported. Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Investigation? Looked into?  In what way do you feel they investigated it?  My read of it was they simply repeat what she allegedly said on her facebook posting, and maybe sent her a FB message. I don't really see any claims of investigation, or any in-depth journalism.  And seriously? When I'm talking about controversial, I'm talking about it the way wikipedia in general seems to see controversial things in the context of BLPs, I'm not judging things in context of back-rooms and tour bus antics at rock concerts. Centerone (talk) 17:52, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm disturbed by the recent edit which states: "the validity of the allegations are irrelevant -- they are simply allegations, and are notable enough to warrant inclusion on the page"  Certainly validity of such claims are absolutely relevant! We have BLP standards, as well as RS standards. Right now we have a statement from a public facebook comment that has since been deleted, we have two websites that aren't much more than blogs, that "covered" the claim without any real investigative journalism, or even seemingly attempts to interview the woman. We can't possibly include or take every comment or allegation someone makes about a celebrity seriously. Centerone (talk) 17:10, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I am cleaning up the Dan Spitz article today to add sources and remove spurious information. I have researched this particular claim and have found that nothing has been reported since the original Facebook accusation. In libel law, it is illegal to falsely accuse someone of a crime in the media, and if the claim is actually true, that is for the law enforcement establishment and court system to determine. The accusation has appeared in no reliable news sources, nor has any news source reported on an investigation, which would be done when evidence of a crime comes to light. When/if any of that happens, it will be a verifiable story for Wikipedia. I don't think that standard has been met yet. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 13:58, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Coming from WT:BLP per Doomsdayer above. BLP urges editors to not include allegations of crimes or other similar activities unless they have been convicted or there are other good reasons. For example, if the accusation, prior to any conviction or confirmation, led to a significant impact on the person's career, that would be necessary to include. In this case, there appears to have been no impact on Spitz and certainly hasn't been corroborted; BLP strongly recommends not including this information even if it can be sourced. --M asem (t) 17:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Per the comment from Masem above (see also WP:BLP), I am removing the text about the accusation from the article. Concerned persons can watch for future developments in the story and add verifiable and corroborated legal proceedings. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 13:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)