Talk:No Innocent Victim

message: A (manual) reversion was undertaken on this article because the version as of 02:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.firestream.net/fs_rate.php?go=showcat&cat_id=1010
The WP:COPYVIO was introduced in the 6 April 2006 edit by .
66.167.253.177 02:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright violation

message: So, Walter, I see you have removed the memberlist a second time, even though the material was not added by Metalworker14; in this case, I restored information that was on the page before he even discovered it. I also notice that you did not remove any names from the inbox, nor did you remove bandmember names from the body of the text. Is your intent to question the validity of the information regarding who played what instrument? Why is this information considered controversial or uncertain for this band, in particular? Chubbles (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: So Chubbles I see you have complained again even though it clearly fails :WP:V. It's instruments and date ranges. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Who played what instrument is not typically even remotely controversial or problematic in terms of verifiability. Date ranges are somewhat more reasonable on that score, but we'd be failing to provide even the most basic information about a band if we did not have any indication of who played what, and almost every band publishes this information in the liner notes of its albums. Chubbles (talk) 05:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right it's not typically controversial, but it's also not verified. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:10, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly what I'm wondering. If it's not reasonably subject to debate or uncertainty, why is verification being demanded nevertheless? We do not, as a rule, remove all unverified material from Wikipedia; we remove all unverifiable material. If there's reason to be genuinely suspicious that there might be something incorrect about what was listed in terms of instrumentation, then I get the action completely. But this is the second time I've seen this stuff get removed without any indication of that, which makes it look more like making a point for its own sake. Chubbles (talk) 14:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because the editor who initially added the information is known to add unsourced information. The editor has in the past added date ranges for former members using a question mark as an end date. The editor does not know nor is the addition of content verifiable. He gleans his information from unreliable sources. Sorry you feel it's POINTy. It's based on WP:V. Get the editor blocked and I'll be less strict on that policy. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The material I restored was not added by Metalworker14, as I noted in my first post here on this talk page. It was on the page before that editor arrived here. Chubbles (talk) 20:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I stand corrected. Your edit. MW's edits:     . He added the grammatically annoying "ex-" to identify musicians with affiliations with other bands and made other edits, most notably to the timeline. Thanks for being persistent and making it clear what the problem was. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of memberlist