" 

 
 {| class=""infobox"" width=""300px"" 
 |- 
 !align=""center""|Archives 

 |- 
 | 
 #2005-present 
 |} 

 __TOC__ 

 ==FA== 
 This article is FA at the Romanian Wikipedia.    

 == Arrest involving Chris Brown and Rihanna == 

 the LA Times has identified the woman that was abused by Chris Brown as Rihanna. This is a reliable source under WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources). I am therefore identifying the victim.    
 :Actually, it reads alledged assault. There was a similar discussion Talk:Rihanna#2009 Grammy's.   

 It's alleged until he's been convicted. I never contended that he was in fact guilty of the assault, just that an incident did occur. I worded the entry in a way to reflect that Rihanna was indeed involved, not necessarily that he is in fact guilty of assaulting her. So the use of the term ""alleged"" is a moot point.    

 I have to agree that given the fact the Los Angeles Times states that police have named Rihanna as the alleged victim, it is appropriate to list her in the article as such. 

    

 ""while under investigation for domestic violence charges, following an argument with singer Rihanna in Hancock Park, Los Angeles, California. Official reports did not name the female in the incident but stated that she had “suffered visible injuries.”"" 

 This should be changed to something like ""while official reports did not name the victim, it was reported by ******************* that Brown was arguing with girlfriend Rihanna prior to the assault"" or something similar to that. As it stands right now it sounds like it was fact that he was in an argument with Rihanna at the time but not that it was a fact that she was the one that got injured. If you are going to accept a report that he was arguing with Rihanna then you should also accept the report that she was the victim of the assault. I could be wrong (since I have not read much about this) but I doubt the ""official sources"" like the police acknowledged that he was arguing with Rihanna at the time but then refused to say that she was the victim.   

 This should now be changed to reflect that Rihanna was the alleged victim of the assault. The LA Times, CNN, and MSNBC have all identified her as the victim. Even though they use unnamed sources, this does not matter. Wikipedia users do not second guess the ability of major news organizations that meet WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:SOURCES to use unnamed sources. News organizations have been using anonymous sources or unnamed sources for years. This is an accepted practice. Frankly,CNN, MSNBC, and the LA Times have all reported this. They have all verified this information. ""The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true."" Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability . These news organizations are reliable sources, and we can check the articles. Done deal.    

 First, I agree that Rihanna has been amply demonstrated as the victim of the assault, at least by Wikipedia's standards of verification.  Secondly, however, I do think we need to remove the laundry list of examples of how Brown's career is in freefall.  While emphasizing that he has been pulled from numerous ads in the wake of the beating is definitely relevant, citing each independent incident is an unnecessary level of detail for an encyclopedi