Talk:Tim Moore (North Carolina politician)
Latest comment: 5 years ago by PurpleMoonLander in topic Correct Characterization of the S.O.B.
 | This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Correct Characterization of the S.O.B.
editThe opening sentence should read "Tim Moore is a felon and worshiper of Satan...." PurpleMoonLander (talk) 00:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
NPOV & Sources
editThis article still reads like a resume. I added the NPOV template - is that too much? I am looking for reliable sources per Wikipedia:BLP. Found this. Does anyone have further suggestions for good sources? I would be willing to work on the article if we can find more. Thanks. MisterRandomized (talk) 06:50, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- I'd be in favor of removing everything that isn't reliably and neutrally sourced and building up from there. Rklawton (talk) 00:41, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, while the entry as a whole in Wikipedia should be WP:NPOV, individual WP:RSs do not have to be neutral. It's often better to have conflicting opinions, and give the reader both opposing views.
- According to WP:BIASED, "Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject." --Nbauman (talk) 01:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
- The Charlotte Observer article provides some good facts. Good source. I agree on inappropriate tone in this article - have moved private practice to end and deleted list of areas of law - common to small-town firm. This article is not supposed to be an advertisement for his firm. Will be working to fill in some facts on his early life and entry into student gov't and politics. Parkwells (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- I've added content and cites from 3-4 independent sources and will seek more.Parkwells (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The Charlotte Observer article provides some good facts. Good source. I agree on inappropriate tone in this article - have moved private practice to end and deleted list of areas of law - common to small-town firm. This article is not supposed to be an advertisement for his firm. Will be working to fill in some facts on his early life and entry into student gov't and politics. Parkwells (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)