Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive30

José Galisteo (closed)
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #ffd8a0;" | José Galisteo – BLP violation material removed – 23:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * style="text-align:center;" | The following is an archived Biographies of living persons incident concerning the article above Please do not modify it. 
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

José Galisteo
I'm listing this here because the subject himself has emailed me, demanding we remove material saying he is gay, that he has performed at gay venues, and that he has gay fans. Every fact has a reliable source, including quotes from him himself discussing gay sex he has had and that he has never had sex with a woman (though I didn't feel it necessary to include all of this information). This is the Spanish Google, which has tons of gay content about him, a lot of it reliable sources. It has been vetted by several people, including an administrator. Still, I thought it best to list it here for review. I am massively disappointed in his reaction, since I wrote it (though in a NPOV manner) because I am such a big fan of him and his music. Jeffpw 21:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how reliable the sources are: they appear to be online-only publications? If so, they might not be good enough for redflag claims like this. --h2g2bob (talk) 18:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, 2g2bob, Gay magazine seems to be both "real world" as well as web based, from what I can tell on their site. Anodis seems a reliable source to me, as well. They have a radio program, a podcast and their website. They also post on their site a journalism code of ethics, which includes the assertion that they have sources for all material and can provide them. The other sites are his own official fan club site, the website for Telecinco, (Spanish National Television station 5) and the blog of the program he appeared on, Operacion Triunfo (Spanish Idols, for lack of a better word. The references are not what concerned me. My concern was Galisteo making trouble for me or Wikipedia in spite of the sources. To be honest, coming here was sort of a CYA for me. By the way, I have given Galisteo the addy for OTRS to contact if he feels it necessary. He is also now planning to edit the article himself, if I read his last email to me correctly. Jeffpw 19:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just being online only does not mean a source is unreliable - New Advent exists only online and is a extremely useful source for Catholic references. The sources on the article have been checked out by both English and Spanish Wikipedians, both when the article was first written and now, and there is nothing wrong with them. Jose Galisteo has made no claims to the effect that he is *not* gay, he simply doesn't want that information in the article, which is both white-washing and unacceptable. This issue is of someone wanting to hide his true self to make more money, and I for one am not going to allow him to do so at the expense of our integrity as an encyclopedia. Removing true, verifiable, and more importantly, cited facts from a BLP because the subject wishes it wasn't true is something we should never allow to happen, or we would have no content at all. And if I may say so, h2g2bob, responding to such a situation by merely slapping a garish label to the top of the article in question is unhelpful in the extreme and only pisses off the people who have devoted time and energy to getting this article right. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't find the results of the Spanish Google search very convincing. These all look like blogs or personal websites. Is the matter discussed in any newspaper accounts? If you have reliable sources, please list them explicitly here. The blogs that claim to be him surely lack all credibility and should not be kept in the article.  Also, the question of whether he is gay seems to take up a large fraction of the article, which is surely disproportionate to what interest he may have as a musical performer. If he has performed in venues thought to be gay, that can be neutrally stated and some of the names of the clubs given. EdJohnston 22:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There is only one blog listed in the article, and that is from the show he was on. The rest are news magazines. Did you actually look at the article, Ed? Jeffpw 22:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * One has to follow the sources. If a disproportionate number of sources discuss his sexuality rather than his work, then to take it upon ourselves to skew the article to what we consider more appropriate is worse than to just write the article and wait for the sources to balance themselves out. And I second what eff said about reading the article - merely checking Google is somewhat pointless given we didn't just pick up random crap from the front page of Google and just drop it in. May I ask if you read Spanish? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Why did you check the Spanish Google? Why didn't you check the article and see the refs there? I assure you, we did our very best to provide reliable sources. Raystorm   (¿Sí?)  22:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Edit conflict
 * Now that I have looked at the article more carefully, I think it's getting close the point where BLP-aware administrators might just swoop in and delete it. Please be aware that this part of our policy is very seriously enforced. Either remove the improperly-sourced assertions that appear to 'out' him as gay, or consider the possibility that the article will be deleted. At a minimum, since User:Jeffpw has received an email from the  subject challenging the truthfulness of the article,  the assertion should be immediately removed while this discussion continues. EdJohnston 22:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It would seem not only do you not read the article, Ed, you do not read the posts here either. Jeff has never stated that Galisteo has chellenged the truth that he is gay, only that he doesn't want it on the article. The information in the article pertaining to Galisteo's sexuality has been cited from approximately five different sources - all of which are reliable. This article will not be deleted just because the subject is sexually ashamed. Please do not make empty threats just because you are using WP:BLP to do so. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Now don';t put words in my mouth, Ed. I flat out asked him if it was libelous or untrue and he replied that it was "is not interesting and I dont want to see it there". That's not the same thing at all. He also said he doesn't want it written that he was i the military, a very innocuous statement, and sourced. Should we pull that, too, because he doesn't like it? Now, I have asked User:SandyGeorgia to look at it, and s/he has said that will happen tonight, American time. Given his/her long term work on WP:FAC and WP:FAR, I trust her implicitly to check for factual accuracy. Further, s/he speaks fluent Spanish, something you haven't said you could. I would ask you and others to wait until s/he checks it out before you "swoop down and delete it". That sounds like a real threat, to me. Jeffpw 23:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * (ec x2)The subject has given interviews to a number of Spanish gay publications in which he stated that he is gay. BLP does not require a whitewash - the article has been worked on in partnership with editors of the Spanish Wikipedia. The sourcing is there. The fact that someone is unhappy with their biography does not make it incompatible with BLP. As a matter of interest, how much Spanish do you speak? Even my limited knowledge of the language confirms that the sources back up the article's content. WjBscribe 23:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

BLP is clear - we don't describe anyone as gay or lesbian unless they clearly self-identify as such. If he does not self-identify as gay (and his apparent retraction of his statements indicates thus), then we don't call him gay. Sexual identity is a personal matter which cannot be imposed upon someone.

From WP:BLP: "Category tags regarding religious beliefs and sexual preference should not be used unless... The subject publicly self-identifies with the belief or preference in question.

If he does not identify as gay, we don't categorize him as such. FCYTravis 23:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I just reverted you because he has not any point retracted his statements regarding being gay, which I believe is why you removed the cat. I think he would rather he hadn't said it, but it doesn't change the fact that he did. Obviously if he denies being gay this is a different matter but as I understand it from what my Spanish counterpart tells me, he has not done any such thing. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * If he does not currently self-identify as gay, we don't categorize him as such. It's that simple. The policy is black and white. Category tags should not be used unless the subject publicly self-identifies. He is not publicly self-identifying. We can and should discuss whether or not he is in the article, and the controversy over his statements, but we cannot use those categories. FCYTravis 23:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that would be pushing BLP to an extreme it was never intended to cover. If someone decides to give interviews to one segment of the media claiming X and to other claiming Y, that is something that should be related if a NPOV article is to be created. There are clear sources where the subject has self-described himself as gay - that's something our article is going to need to address. We have recieved no corresponce that has claimed the article is unture, only that that someone claiming to be the subject wishes it said something else. There has been no OTRS contact - where we could at least confirm who we are dealing with and request clarification of the material points. WjBscribe 23:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Nobody is suggesting that the matter should not be covered in the article as a controversy. We certainly should include the public debate, speculation and conflicting reports on his sexuality, to a limited extent so that they do not overwhelm the rest of the biography. But we cannot categorize him as gay or bisexual unless he has made a clear, unretracted and undisputed statement that he is gay or bisexual. A category is black and white and cannot be applied to situations which are in shades of gray, as this one is. We don't have a category called "Might be gay depending on which interview you read this week." FCYTravis 00:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize for not reading the cited sources carefully enough before my previous comment, and I went overboard calling it a serious violation. Nonetheless, I'm still puzzled by how important this should be considered in such a short article, and outing somebody who writes to Wikipedia and asks for it not to be mentioned (for whatever reason, even if slightly hypocritical) seems unnecessary. The fact that he performs in gay clubs is still germane and can be mentioned with no problems. EdJohnston 00:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That still presumes the email writer is Jose and not some fan aggrieved by the tone of the article. The categories may not be justified if there has been a public retraction, but the controversy from making strikingly different claims in different media seems someothing that can be validly covered. WjBscribe 00:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm just now getting around to looking at this, having read all of your posts at AN/I and here at BLP. If I'm understanding correctly, there are several issues here wrt how we interpret BLP, but the question is coming down to how reliable are the sources that identify him as gay; more specifically, according to BLP, does he self-identify as gay in any reliable sources? Is that a correct summary of what I'm looking for? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 00:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, Sandy, that's a correct summary. I ran the articles through Babelfish, and got a general sense of them, and then went to Spanish members to translate for me. After they read the paragraph they told me the refs supported it, and helped me to find the right articles for each assertion. From what I heard from the other members, and from my own translation (not only of the articles but also the site's background), I came to the conclusion that the refs were reliable enough for a BLP article. It was a collaboration, but I am ultimately responsible for the content and refs. Jeffpw 00:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I approach an article kind of linearly ... hard to read it until I clean up the minor MOS stuff :-)
 * The first source, José Galisteo en el Festival Europride´07 is published by a bank, Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria S.A., and appears to be mostly a gimmicky page for generating revenues. If you trace back to their main page, you'll find a tiny pop-up at the very top of the page, under Aviso legal.  The wording there does not inspire confidence as to WP:RS:
 * (a) La información facilitada por BBVA debe ser considerada por el usuario a modo de introducción, sin que pueda estimarse como elemento determinante para la toma de decisiones, declinando el Banco toda responsabilidad por el uso que pueda verificarse de la misma en tal sentido, y de forma específica ha de entenderse que dicha información, sometida a la normativa vigente en España, no va destinada a aquellos usuarios que actúen bajo otras jurisdicciones de Estados que exijan el cumplimiento de requisitos distintos para la puesta a disposición, divulgación o publicidad de servicios y/o productos financieros.
 * (d) BBVA no responde de la veracidad, integridad o actualización de las informaciones que no sean de elaboración propia y de las que se indique otra fuente, así como tampoco de las contenidas en otros websites mediante hiperenlace o vínculo desde www.bluejoven.com, facilitados al usuario como fuentes alternativas de información, que se regirán por los términos y condiciones de utilización que a tal efecto resulten exigibles por los titulares de dichos sitios web, por lo que BBVA no asume responsabilidad alguna en cuanto a hipotéticos perjuicios que pudieran originarse por el uso de las citadas informaciones. En ningún caso, los mencionados hiperenlaces serán considerados como recomendación, patrocinio, o distribución por parte de BBVA de la información, productos y/o servicios, o, en general, contenidos de titularidad de terceros, ofrecidos por éstos o en cualquier forma por los mismos divulgados.


 * It's not the kind of site I'm comfortable with, but it's not being used to cite anything controversial (so I won't translate all of that).


 * On the second site (his Fansclub, which has a bio page), I could find no info to verify the antipathy to the military. I linked directly to the bio page on the site, and moved the ref to the info it verified. The military info is verified in the GayMagazine site.


 * GayMagazine presents the requisite credential page, but I can't speak to their fact checking or editorial oversight. Same for ANODIS.


 * oops, still digging through here, but it's not looking good. I'm going to ping Jossi, who knows BLP and who speaks Spanish, for another look.  We have two sources (GayMagazine and ANODIS, La Agencia de Noticias sobre Diversidad Sexual) reporting the story.GM ANODIS  But.  They quote it in a way that it's not clear to me that they're quoting *him*, or if they are quoting what was found on the internet, and the place where it was found on the internet seems to be reported in blogs and not at all reliable. Fotos: Video:José Galisteo.  I'm not comfortable with what I'm finding so far. It's not clear to me that they are quoting *him*, so I can't say he has self-identified.  I can say it's possible it's all a blog-fueled story.  If they are quoting him, the relevant quote is that at the age of 22 he's never had sex with a girl  (the tias) but has with men (the tios) at 19 (first penetration).  "Yo todavía soy virgen... con las mujeres... Yo nunca me he tirado a una tía. Una vez a los 22 lo intenté con una amiga, pero iba tan borracho que ni me trempé. Con los tíos mi primera vez con penetración fue a los 19 años."  ANODIS and GM are reporting the same story, and their source isn't clear to me.  Because of the way they write it, it is not clear to me that those words can be attributed directly to him, and the blog is dubious.  The way I'm reading ANODIS, it specifically says he has *not* self-identified (rather has been forced out), but I'd like Jossi to take a look.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Sandy, I appreciate all your hard work. I have to go to bed now (2:30am here), and will return tomorrow to see what Jossi says, if s/he has replied by then. Thank you very much. Jeffpw 01:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No prob; it's not at all clear reporting to me. Also, if Jossi (or others) read the sources as I do, we may need to BLP delete "In an interview, portions of which were reprinted in the Chilean Gaymagazine, he admitted he was gay,[3] but later claimed he was forced into saying that."  I'm not clear that it's an interview, or just those magazines repeating what was found on the internet.  If Jossi doesn't pop in soon, I'll ping Tito or Joelito or someone else. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * One can also have sexual relations with other men, yet not self-identify as gay, just as you don't have to have sexual relations with other men to identify as gay. Thanks for doing more digging - I do not speak Spanish, unfortunately. FCYTravis 02:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I speak Spanish and will take a look at these sources. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I read these sources and it is clear to me that it is just speculation being voiced in these sources, which do not meet the threshold for reliability on this subject. I have removed the material in question. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Given that there are some editors that keep restoring the material in question, I have protected the article for 2 hours, to give others the opportunity to review the material as well. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 04:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Having only a limited knowledge of Spanish I'm not in a position to evaluate the sources. I agree with Sandy above that one of the key distinctions in whether the subject gave interviews to the cited publications or whether they merely quoted web content (now it seems challenged as a hoax) as if it were an interview. It really would have been better to get an uninvolved admin to protect the page though... WjBscribe 04:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, are the sources reliable enough to say there's been speculation about his sexuality, without labeling him as gay? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't see it there, but that's why I asked for another opinion. My Spanish is fluent, but I'm not a native speaker, so I was afraid I'd missed something (although my spouse, a native speaker, didn't see it either).  The *way* these sources report is very shady, so I'm not sure they're reliable.  I didn't see the sources clearly stating it was an interview, they hedged with how they set up the paragraphs in terms of what they were saying, and they both read as if they were passing along innuendo encountered elsewhere, without clearly specifying the source of the information.  And I didn't find the same info in any reliable source.  On the other hand, there was wording in ANODIS that did make it clear he had not self-identified.  I'm comfortable that we did the right thing.  I also searched in Spanish for some of the other phrases found in GayMagazine attributed to Galisteo, and they didn't show up.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Here is the specific reason for my concern, from GayMagazine. They provide a lot of quotes, but never say it was a direct interview. What they do say is: ... which is quite wishy-washy, but it leaves the impression that they claim he is the anon poster of those quotes at skyscrapercity.com bulletin board (made five years ago). They don't establish that he made those posts, so this is the worst kind of reporting, and what Wiki should specifically avoid. On the other hand, I can see how it appeared legit to Jeffpw, because the reporting is quite vague and tricky. This is why we demand the highest quality sources on BLP. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 05:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Los rumores que terminaron sacando del closet a Galisteo dieron pie a la prensa del corazón española para indagar sobre el. Es así como se ha dado con un foro sobre rascacielos skyscrapercity.com en el que opina sobre la vida, el ambiente gay, su novio o las pruebas de selección de OT, con lo que se construye el perfil de un hombre maduro, con pareja estable; Karim de 33 años, DJ, afincado en París, preocupado por la naturaleza y aficionado a la arquitectura. 
 * Thanks, all, for your help! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm kind of late to the party, but the sources are essentially hearsay. I can't find anything that says that the dude himself says he is gay. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 07:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Though naturally I am disappointed when content I have added is removed, I am always pleased to see Wikipedia improved. Sandy, Jossi and all others who have participated in this review: thank you so much for helping out, and thanks for caring so much about the project. Jeffpw 08:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, Thank you as well from receiving feedback in a constructive manner. It is not always the case, you know? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 14:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * style="text-align:center;" | The above is an archived Biographies of living persons incident concerning the article above. Please do not modify it. 
 * }
 * }

Xi Jinping (closed)
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #ffd8a0;" | Xi Jinping – Deleted personal ilfe material that violates BLP, NPOV, and Verifiability;  – 23:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * style="text-align:center;" | The following is an archived Biographies of living persons incident concerning the article above Please do not modify it. 
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

Xi Jinping and Newsweek
I'm including this here under "other issues" -- and serious they are.

The November 5, 2007 issue of Newsweek includes a reference to the Wikipedia article on Xi Jinping, who is one of the high leaders of the People's Republic of China. On page 15, Newsweek staffwriters Melinda Liu and Jonathan Ansfield wrote about Xi that one of his assets to Westerners is that he is perceived to be a "bumpkin." Liu and Ansfield then add that "clodhopper" is the phrase used "by his Wikipedia entry," which is in fact the case. That is exactly the word used to describe Xi in a comment attributed, without a source, to his wife.

The article has already been flagged with a note that it lacks references, and the section that includes the "clodhopper" word has no citations at all. The overall article has four links; one is in Chinese, one is a dead link to CNN, and the other two have nothing to do with Xi's personal life. Accordingly, the section violates BLP requirements as well as the being non-Verifiable. The section is also patently POV.

Moreover, the section puts all Wikipedia in an extraordinarily bad light. I do not believe that under any circumstances Wikipedia should simply be a gossip column about world leaders. We are not talking about Joe Shmoe, whose garage band somebody doesn't like; this article is discussing a man who is likely to become the next leader of China. I do not believe that Wikipedia's mission includes gossip and insult about world leaders. This has nothing to do with our politics or whether we like Xi or not. It is, instead, central to the principles of objectivity and neutrality that underlie Wikipedia.

I have therefore removed the section.

It can, of course, be found on the history pages, and has therefore not been lost to the archives. But we cannot have this kind of garbage -- a strong word, but that is what it is -- giving all of Wikipedia as bad a name as this does. If you want to revert, please be aware that you will have to defend putting back a section that (a) has NO references or citations, (b) violates Wiki: BLP; (c) violates Wiki: NPOV and Wiki: Verifiability; (d) is pure unadulterated gossip; and (e) has been quoted, to our disadvantage, in Newsweek.

Timothy Perper 17:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes Timothy, unfortunately this happens quite often. Not enough eyeballs on some BLPs mean this problem is not going away. What would be interesting is to find out who added that material and check other contributions to BLPs. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It is this user:, which has been adding dubious and unsourced statements to several articles related to China and its leaders. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * style="text-align:center;" | The above is an archived Biographies of living persons incident concerning the article above. Please do not modify it. 
 * }
 * }