User:Filll/AGF Challenge: Wife-Other

.Briefly explain the disputed claims in the article Johnbod (talk) 14:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

In the article, note the discrepancy. In an email to the author, explain the importance of verifiability and reliable sources, and ask if he has any sources for sole authorship that can be used to improve the article. Confusing Manifestation (Say hi!) 06:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I would first asked the author what he meant and how comes. If he claims the webpage is an error, I would put "according to such and such website", also ask for a possible source of his version of the story, e.g. the personal website may be such a source Alex Bakharev (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Write that he coauthored books with his wife, and also wrote books with single authorship. Don't get sucked into overstatement just because he does. Unless there is legit dispute that he authored independently, self-published "list of published works" is acceptable as RS for uncontroversial self-claims once independently published sources determine related notability has met the wp benchmark   Professor marginalia (talk) 01:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Report that, while these sources (list the sources) state specifically that the books were co-authored by the person and his wife, the author himself has filed a claim with Wikipedia disputing that data. Applejuicefool (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Simple really - we have the books for sale on the couples, and other websites. Books have an ISBN number - a search on any ISBN database will reveal the information held by the ISBN for the books - namely the author/s. The books publisher would also have this information. (This information would also be on record at the Library of Congress in the US, similar national libraries if published elsewhere). Rewrite article with ISBN links and information, an email to the author to state that WP deals with verifiable and reliable sources, and that the information on the article is directly sourced from Library of Congress as well as confirmation from publishers etc.Akitora (talk) 14:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * First it must be established that the emailer is who he says he is. If this can not be established, then it must be dismissed. If the author is truly making these claims, suggest he assert them them in other media as wikipedia is not a news source, and not a place to break stories. If he has already done so then his claim to sole authorship, as well as the response would be recorded in reliable news sources. Rds865 (talk) 00:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Phrase the article such that a) co-authorship is not immediately obvious b) do not list his bibliography in the article itself, but instead link to OCLC for a directory of publications. -- Fullstop (talk) 02:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't make any direct claims about who is the author. Rather, simply cite what the sources say. Say things like, "In X's biography, he states 'my wife coauthored some of my books.'" You can't lose a libel suit for citing sources accurately, but you can potentially lose a libel suit for endorsing what the source says, if the source is false. This is why journalists use the word alleged so much, even if they don't particularly point out the opposing point of view (which in this case is not verifiable). CO GDEN  04:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If the co-authorship is reliably sourced, then include it, but since this is a bio, the subject himself can also be quoted without a reliable source. So I would say, "In interviews with XXX, he indicated that his wife was a co-author, and she is listed as co-author in several publications. However, XXX now disputes the claim of co-authorship". This is libel-proof, and verifiable, and it should appease the author. If he wants to change his mind after the fact, there's no reason not to document that fact along with the clear evidence that at one time he did consider her co-author. ATren (talk) 03:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Stick a disputed tag on it and ask a wikimedia foundation lawyer. If he can't sue, go by the reliable sources. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Write both sides. (The book is listed as written by the author alone, but the author has stated in interviews [provide link to interview here] that his wife did in fact co-author.-- Emprovision (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Consider how important and notable the individual, his wife, and his books are. If they are notable, then cite to all the reliable sources in the article, accurately saying who wrote each book.  If notability is not established, then delete the pages. Bwrs (talk) 04:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Tell him which primary sources we are quoting, ask if there are other sources that we have missed, and suggest that he get any errors fixed in the primary sources before seeking to change the Wikipedia article. Jonathan Cardy (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Tell him to get lost. A case like that would never hold up in court. Period. Leave the article bio as it is, ban the author if he tries to change it. This is not a BLP issue, this is a whine. --Logical Premise (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Go to your local library (this is a physical brick-and-mortar building). Look at actual copies of the actual books (these are made out of a couple of hundred leaves of paper, bound together in a cover, and weigh a pound or so.)  Write down the title and all authors listed on the title page.  Go home.  Type information gathered at library into Wikipedia.  Done.  &mdash; G716  &lt;T·C&gt; 05:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * (Addendum - scan the front cover of some of the books, load images into Wikipedia under fair use, and illustrate the article with this damning evidence of authorship). &mdash; G716  &lt;T·C&gt; 05:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Have the OTRS editor reply back that we have a bit of evidence, including their own statements and website, and ask them to help us reconcile the difference. If they persist in legal threats then i think the foundations legal process has to step in. Meanwhile, try to verify which books, if any, are co-authored using Google books and Amazon.com as reference. If those are rather clear then it may be advisable to add references to a list of coauthored books so other editors can confirm the co-authorship is valid. 71.139.36.216 (talk) 23:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If he is threatening to sue, then, chances are, he has complained about this situation elsewhere. Find such a source, and update the article to point out he has contested that the books were co-authored (cite the source) -Bertrc (talk) 14:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Note the author's claim in the article's talk page. If possible, link to the text of the email on the talk page. Then politely email the author tell him that, for now, the article will still list his wife as a coauthor for those ten books. Direct him to WP:VERIFY and also remind him that several websites, including his and his wife's, list her as a coauthor on those ten books. There is no way to verify that the sender of the email is, in fact, the author. The claim should not go into the article yet, because there is no way to verify that the author himself is making the claim. It could just be someone messing around. --- cymru lass (hit me up)⁄(background check) 21:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Direct the author to WP:LEGAL and ask for reliable sources that can prove the author's point of view. Guoguo12  --Talk--  19:09, 29 October 2010 (UTC)