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 Stub-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 United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
@David Gerard and other interested editors. As I mentioned in my edit summary, I would read that RSN discussion as "no consensus". That doesn't mean it needs to be removed from BLPs, particularly as the Free Press source is not used for controversial claims or challenged material, and is backed up by other sources that are clearly reliable. While I don't think it's essential to include this particular source, I don't think it is essential to remove it, either, and it provides a journalistic profile of Chambers which we are able to pull several useful encyclopedic details from for our article. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Literally the first response is "absolutely not". In any case, you shouldn't be looking for excuses to add anything other than reliable sources to a WP:BLP, and certainly not just for colour. Why are you so very keen to include this particular source? - David Gerard (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
