" 

 '''Jeff Nix =  Jeff Nix  2/20/08 - Thanks for the Dialogue here. The article does need updating, I have many references, source materials, citations, such as President Bush’s original letter awarding the point of light. I am not sure how to validate the citation in the “eyes” of Wikipedia. I would be happy to move to updating as soon s the clean up is accomplished. On the other suggestions towards the end of cleaning up the BLP on Earl Paulk,  I cite each with comment:  

 Smallbones  - “but there is very good evidence used in the controversies section”  JeffNix – the “evidence” is accusation only. The references to factual data as the out of court settlement and action with Brewers is still in my edit. I only sought to remove sensationalism and tabloid journalism. Scandalous reports by confirmed news outlets based on unfounded and dropped allegations do not constitute evidence or print worthy encyclopedic reference, in my opinion and in keeping with “do no harm” and NPOV.  

 Smallbones - “There's also a guilty plea on a perjury charge, based on DNA evidence that he fathered his ""nephew,"" a confession (through his lawyer)”  JeffNix – I would agree on the factual placement of the guilty plea, it is a part of history, irrefutable, undeniable, grounded in durable definitive fact. The connection to DNA and paternity is irrelevant in my view. That fact presses the envelope on violation of personal information that does not serve the BLP criteria. I would agree to preserve the plea information but truncate the reference. In particular, I would prefer it read similar as follows: “Earl Paulk received a guilty ruling on a perjury charge linked to false statements concerning a paternity issue within his immediate family. This action was not directly related to any allegation brought by any of  Paulk’s accusers” Anything along these lines serves the facts well while not sensationalizing the data as the news media has done so handily. Fair weight and neutrality are best served when inflammatory, and provocative selective verbiage is eliminated, and this BLP is full of it..    
 
 Smallbones – “Looks to me there's plenty of well documented evidence”.  JeffNix – I respectfully submit that there is plenty of well documented sensationalized hyperbole. Please note that I do not at all seek to minimize the facts or selectively allow less harmful material. I have however, drawn a careful distinction between irrefutable fact and sensationalized advocacy journalism. I purposely left all the relevant facts associated with any sexual misconduct allegation. I will go back and pay special attention to this declaration to assure that the facts are indeed intact within my edits.   

 WAVY 10 Fan – “there is a good chance you will be hard pressed to find much on Paulk that doesn't revolve around these varied sexual misdeeds”  JeffNix  - Not to criticize, rather to state the intuitively obvious, YES, indeed, much of what one finds as current events in the modern media about Earl Paulk does in fact revolve around “these varied sexual misdeeds”… as written and sensationalized'''. Prior to the emergence of pile on styled accusation, the press about Earl Paulk was all solid, commendable, and exemplary of a lifetime of dedicated service as a man of the cloth. What is now being rpesented as original press is nothing more than regurgitated shock factor tabloid trouncing. I have no problem dealing with the factual aspects of this BLP but adding accusation and potentially libelous material attempts to legitimize the allegations  which do nothing but exacerbate the frailty of the human condition; this cannot possibly further the Wikipedia objectives of fair treatment in the spirit of neutrality. What it does proffer is furtherance of the “court of public opinion”.     

 As the editors consider my position about this BLP, note now please my free commentary: If the Wikipedia project begins to allow innuendo to rule the day, the very basis of principle of factual encyclopedic preservation is all but lost, having succumbed to the popular culture of man seeking to define his existence in the lowest possible terms. Within the Wikipedia community of rational thinkers, thoughtfully contemplative measures should be assumed as priorities against the tyrannical nature of the modern media’s “gotcha style” systematic destruction of all things good and proper. Yes, we should show the warts but not destroy those afflicted by them through unrelenting investigative journalism that unnecessarily widens a gap as to make it impossible to bridge. For the most part, inclusion of the accusers information in the Earl Paulk BLP essentially establishes, glorifies, encourages, adds credibility to, expands and sanctions they very spirit of degradation that each of the Wikipedia tenants strive to avoid.  [[Special:Contributions/68.184.149.224|68.184.149.2