Talk:Larry Klayman

Failed Appeals
I can't believe that this guy's wikipedia page has ZERO RESULTS when searched for "children". It was found as fact by a trial court, reaffirmed by an appellate court, and that reaffirmation was affirmed by another appellate court. It all factual, government-sourced information, zero validity issues at all whatsoever. But before I add it. . . educate me as to what I must be missing here. . . ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.115.4 (talk) 09:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP. This is especially so in this case because there are allegations and Klayman's denials. A BLP-compliant version would have to include many details and specifics, to properly frame that the initial court's finding was inferred from Klayman's refusal to answer certain questions. In addition, the court's findings were published in newspapers, and Klayman promptly sued them for defamation. Yes, the newspapers eventually won, but defending lawsuits isn't free. --Weazie (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, this topic was twice discussed in the archives; one discussion linked to a BLP-noticeboard discussion about Klayman. --Weazie (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2021 (UTC)