"

 The lack of sourcing in this article is a serious matter and needs to be addressed.  If you want to hear less noise about it, put your money where your mouth is and show that this subject has been the recipient of non-trivial coverage from reliable sources.  As of right now, this article is one giant violation of our reliable sources and verifiability policies, and ignoring that problem doesn't make it go away.   Furthermore, I'm not sure people who were closely associated with this person should be handling this article at all as there appears to be an underlying conflict of interest at stake which seems to be motivating said ignorance.   (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄TAB "