Wikipedia:Editorial findings/Log/Ward Churchill

Regarding the use of Ward Churchill as a source in articles.

After gaining prominence as a writer on ethnic and political issues, Churchill attracted the attention of political and academic critics. His place of teaching later formed a committee to investigate Churchill's work, which found that some of his research methods were flawed and represented misconduct. He sued the school and a jury found he was wrongly terminated, but the judge vacated the jury finding, citing a legal concept that the committee was a quasi-judicial body and therefore legally immune.

The issue then is how to consider Churchill as a source, if the circumstances behind his firing were politicized, and if the vacation of his legal recourse was based in uncommon law (law that itself appears to have circumvented the need for a jury trial in the first place).


 * Total rejection of Churchill as a source: Without exceptions, Churchill should not be cited as a source in articles.


 * Acceptance of Churchill as a source: Without exceptions, Churchill should not be pre-rejected as a source in articles.


 * Limited context rejection of Churchill as a source: Churchill can be cited as a source in articles, except in the case of points which were in the scope of the committee findings of misconduct.