Talk:Liz Kershaw

High profile
I'm not sure that that's really true anymore. SteveRamone 21:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Groped on air
Kershaw recently came forward following an e-mail from the Director General wanting employees to come forward with info on allegations relating to Jimmy Savile. Whilst at Radio 1, Kershaw has disclosed that she was groped live on air. The presenter remains anon. Is it worth writing a section on the recent allegation of groping on air?

Deletions
I strongly object to both the removal of the talk section & the edit protection. The only recent IP edits were me and that other person. 3 edits in total, all clearly made in good faith...edit protection is often overused, but this is just...off the scale abuse of the feature. As for my talk page comments: While I've generally despaired that newspapers are accepted as RS on wikipedia....they are. Tens of thousands of citations....including the daily mail. The Telegraph and the Guardian are currently used in this article. I feel it particularly obscene that the one time it is disputed by a mod is one of the rare cases where the article is accurate. This is a major story that has been defacto censored in the UK by a judge, but that censorship does not apply to wikipedia. The reduced number of sources is something wikipedia should be capable of working around, as, without wanting to knock Kershaws future potential, this is probably going to be the biggest aspect of her life. 92.15.52.18 (talk) 03:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok - where to start? The Daily Mail is the single source of all these allegations - and they're just hearsay, sorry - and everything else is just blogs and commentary on that one article. It's just not enough. For a biographical article a single, dubious source spreading serious allegations is simply unacceptable. Furthermore, it's potentially libelous, as far as I'm concerned, and cannot be allowed stand. The fact that a UK judge had to be careful with this should tip you off as to its seriousness. Feel free to bring my conduct to the admin noticeboard, by all means, but I stand by this here. When it's something as serious and sensitive as this, then we really need to be careful. This applies to all biographies and not just this woman's. In fact, I'm dealing with this in my capacity as a oversighter, as I received a report about this from a number of editors - A l is o n  ❤ 20:19, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed those edits from the article history, per policy. Log here - A l is o n  ❤ 20:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)