Talk:Jamie Robson

"Drink-driving" allegations
The relevant section detailing recent media coverage of Robson, which I had removed from the article, has been restored by Jamacfarlane. Their rationale was to cite WP:PUBLICFIGURE, specifically "if an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article". I wound counter that as per WP:NOTNEWS, "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion". So just because something has been reported on and can be sourced it doesn't automatically mean we need to include it. In this case, allegations have been made or alluded to via social media and tabloid journalism, but it appears there is no police investigation and Mr Robson's employers have apparently decided to accept his explanation. So, it would appear at present that the incident will not have any legal or career consequences and will most probably not have any "enduring notability"; therefore I would question the need to include it in an article, particularly in a BLP, where it can be seen to paint the subject in a bad light despite the lack of any disciplinary or legal proceedings. So I would be grateful for further opinions about whether this material should be taken back out. Jellyman (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Third Opinion
A Third Opinion has been requested. However, there has not yet been substantive discussion on this article talk page. The Third Opinion request will be removed. Please continue discussion here. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

As an editor and not as a third opinion, I will comment that, in a biography of a living person, when dealing with reported but unproved allegations of violations of criminal laws, it is usually best not to include them in the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose I don't think it should be added. At this stage it is only alleged because of a private video, it isn't a police charge and he hasn't been formally charged for it. His own club has take no action apart from having a word to him. So unless something changes, it isn't news and shouldn't be on Wikipedia. NZFC  (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2018 (UTC)