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 sourcedmust 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.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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
@User:TheManInTheBlackHat Thanks for the reverts, I've already warned the user who appears to have a conflict of interest based on the username. That is the second time I've mentioned it to that user. I think their edits have all been reverted, so I think the COI tag isn't necessary. Do you agree? CT55555(talk) 14:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair, I forgot to check the edit summary. Removed, but it's been added to my watchlist. TheManInTheBlackHat(Talk) 14:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't have the ability to roll back, so I'm glad you're watching this one. CT55555(talk) 14:19, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think more rolling back may be needed, notwithstanding there may be valid privacy elements made by the apparent COI editor. CT55555(talk) 14:40, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The subjects job title was sourced from her employer's website and the COI editor seeks to remove that on the basis of personal safety. That seems reasonable, but it leaves us unable to say/cite her occupation. I think we should leave it out, considering she is notable, but not very notable. Any thoughts @User:TheManInTheBlackHat or others? CT55555(talk) 14:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While the website and it's contents are public, I can understand why someone wouldn't want that on Wikipedia for privacy concerns. It should be left out. Now, whether that should be scrubbed from the edit history is another question. TheManInTheBlackHat(Talk) 14:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On reflection, I have removed this info, primarily for the following reasons;
It's not really a part of her notability and personal.
The source used does not name her as Maggie Braun, but a by different name. The photo of her strongly suggests it is the same person, as she appears elsewhere on other sources. But combining this info, to determine that it's the same person, would constitute original synthesis.
I'd therefore suggest that it should not appear on this article, unless better sourced. --Escape Orbit(Talk) 16:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}