User talk:Formerflanker

August 2022
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Anton Bredell. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ''So--"Controversy" sections are discouraged, and in BLPs you need to be much more careful. And when you start writing things like "This is a pattern of behaviour and misconduct..." (which, BTW, is not good writing), you are making our article state things in Wikipedia's voice that are not factual statements. Please reconsider your approach here.'' Drmies (talk) 03:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, This is taken from the article referenced and supported by the facts of the letter the MEC sent to the George Municipality. The MEC is a public figure, who has been found on 2 separate occasions to have breached his code of ethics, for the essentialy the same thing, which is acting unconstitutionally and unlawfully as mentioned. I have used public sources for the edits. Formerflanker (talk) 04:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


 * You seem to have a penchant for adding 'controversy' sections, which is, as mentioned, discouraged. You also add your personal tone and commentary to the sourced content. Additionally, there are questions as to whether allegations that are several years old have been confirmed or dismissed. If the latter, then the content probably doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Ditto the above re: reconsidering motive here. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:71F0 (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * public figures and elected officials are subject to public scrutiny, unfortunately some are also often embroiled in controversy to one degree or another. This is not the personal page of Anton Bredell as a civilian, but of his political activity. The Public Protector has a serious role to play within the South African Constitution, and the findings are the result of investigation and consideration of evidence presented via complaints about official and elected public representatives.  All the references use language directly from the Public Protector reports and judicial outcomes. Formerflanker (talk) 04:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The encyclopedia has WP:BLP guidelines. You wrote What is disturbing of the George Municipality is that there are also racial overtones at play in undermining a suitably qualified black female in favour of a less qualified white male. What is your reliable source for implying racism in a public figure's actions? 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:71F0 (talk) 04:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Was there a reason you omitted this, which was included in the source you used? 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:71F0 (talk) 04:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That is a fair point, I will ensure that any further edits include the full context and content being cited. Formerflanker (talk) 05:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)