They can also dispense with talk page formalities, and leave everything to edit summaries (i.e. no specter of EW).
But where discussion is best, please → User talk:JFHJr/BLPNW.
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Noteworthiness
editContent in an encyclopedic biography for any living person should appear in due weight and be noteworthy, or biographically significant. Noteworthiness is not the same as notability; events and details themselves need not be independently notable to be worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedic biography. However, the actual and enduring significance of most facts, events, and accomplishments should be demonstrated through reliable secondary sources. This is especially true of claims touching at a subject's notability. Given the significance of a fact, its prose within the article must present the information with due weight.
Reliable sources
editThe significance of particular facts and events, as well as the relevance of topics outside a subject's notability, is best demonstrated primarily by coverage in verifiable, reliable, secondary sources. In most cases, basic biographical information such as name, date and place of birth, familial relations, nationality and residence can come from sources published by the subject if such sources are the most reliable.
Beyond basic biographical information, reliable secondary sources are appropriate to distinguish between encyclopedically significant facts and trivial content. The subject, other parties to an event, and other primary sources may indicate that a fact is true or that an event occurred, but alone they are generally insufficient to demonstrate the importance of that fact or event. Trivial facts can also become noteworthy later, depending on the nature and duration of further coverage; cf. WP:TOOSOON.
For example, reliable secondary sources may support content regarding politics and religion or charity in articles on living actor/directors and CEOs. However, receipt of an award that enjoys no coverage in secondary sources is most likely insignificant.
Due weight
editInformation in living persons' biographies must be balanced so that prose assigns due weight, whether positive, neutral, or negative. Depending on the weight assigned within an article, the requirements of biographical noteworthiness may be — but are not always — less stringent than those of notability. Content about persons notable for a single event and people who are relatively unknown should be treated with caution, as inclusion of unrelated information may present problems of undue weight.
For example, a public figure's career-ending controversy might garner a paragraph or section of encyclopedic content. On the other hand, the biography of a living academic should not detail instances of being haled into court, unless such controversy directly touches upon that subject's notability. Due weight should be determined through editorial consensus.
Sources
editIn general, existing guidelines on reliable sources are sufficient. Policies on self-publications by or regarding living persons, general self-publications, and due weight, as well as notability guidelines indicate such sources are strongly discounted in evaluating the relevance or notability of any particular fact or event in the grand scheme of that living person's life. When topical noteworthiness is established by reliable sources, facts and events can and should be augmented by reliable self-publications. Even then, topically irrelevant facts usually don't belong. For example:
Björk's favourite number is zero — "a fresh start."
<ref>{{cite news|title=Björk Reveals Her Favourite Things in Massive Tour |url=http://unrelatedpar.ty |publisher=Unrelated News & Publishing Inc. Co. [[GmbH]]. |author=Reporter, Total Stranger |date=2020-01-17}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|quote=Zero - A fresh start. |url=http://b-faq.bjorkish.net/about/about-40.htm |title=Björk FAQ |work=Björk website |publisher=[[Björk Guðmundsdóttir]] |accessdate=2013-03-09}}</ref>
In the absence of reliable coverage, or when the topical relevance is not very readily discernible, the information is most probably not noteworthy at best, unencyclopedic at worst, and should go. This is especially true in terms of controversial statements.
Local news and special interest coverage are not indicative of encyclopedic noteworthiness, however mainstream national coverage and books by reputable publishers may be. When a topic is relevant and noteworthy, local news and special interest sources can be used to augment better sourced material.
In any living person's biography, the onus is on the proponents of inclusion to demonstrate topical relevance and source reliability for any content.