Userid333

O'Donnell

The material was removed "per WP:BLP", so it should not be replaced without discussion. With controversial material in biographical articles, the onus is on the person restoring the material to show that it is appropriate. Guettarda (talk) 03:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Response: The content was removed originally because the editor asserted that there was not sufficient coverage of the incidents in "mainstream" media. The reversion's comments noted that this was not correct, and a subsequent edit included additional reliable sources. There appears to be no violation of WP:BLP, and the removal appears unjustified. A Google web and news search for the terms "lawrence o'donnell mormon" will result in wide substitution by reliable sources of the information conveyed in the removed material. Thus it should be replaced. Userid333 (talk) 13:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It's entirely beside the point whether you agree with the criteria or not. The onus is on you to prove your point if you want to re-insert the material, and the way to do that is by building consensus on the article's talk page. It's not about simply asserting that you're right - it's about discussing the issue, convincing other people of your position. And using the article's talk page to do so. Guettarda (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Understood. I believe that the comment about the google searches addresses the point of whether there is sufficient coverage and whether there is a controversy. Subsequent events (O'Donnell's apology) further substantiate that there is a controversy but as you say that's the point of the article's talk page. Userid333 (talk) 19:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)