Talk:Judge Charles F. Sandoval

Neutrality, reference tags
The content which is already supported by external links is damning enough; on top of that there are passages whose tone is not neutral. Could benefit from clean-up, including inline cites to support thus far unsourced interpretations and claims, so as not to appear to have an agenda. JNW (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

How about now?

Publius MaximusPublius maximus (talk) 01:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't live anywhere near Texas, and have never heard of the judge. But the bias of the article is evident from the start, and the references are often meaningless or unacceptable . At a glance, many of the sources appear to be blogs, and there are numerous unsourced opinions within the article. I don't want to go through line by line right now, but if I can't or don't return to this soon, I would strongly advise a careful reading of WP:BLP, WP:NPOV and WP:SOURCES for guidelines on writing a credible and objective biography. Right now it's mostly a case against the subject. JNW (talk) 02:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Stubbed
I have stubbed this article for numerous WP:BLP violations. It may need to be deleted altogether, since it's unclear that it's notable, but that's another issue. For the time being, please do not add any negative material which is not extremely well sourced, i.e. high quality mainstream publication (e.g. not a blog, online forum, or advocacy site). Also, primary sources are unacceptable for controversial issues without secondary sources to interpret them for us. Crum375 (talk) 02:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)