Talk:Steven Galloway

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Steven Galloway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131029150716/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/books/article31297.ece to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/books/article31297.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Typically, the order in which the events of a subject's life are portrayed is: basic facts, personal history, then followed up with current legal issues etc. whereas this article begins with the current issues... Steph6n (talk) 16:34, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of life events 

message: Theres an edit war going on right now, so I figured I'd put a spot to discuss it on this talk page. It concerns the section title "sexual and physical assault accusations & defamation lawsuit", which in late October a use with ip 70.71.254.85 added the word "false" to. This is problematic for more than a few reasons, namely because it would lead a read to believe these allegations have been proven false, or even ever saw the inside of a courtroom; neither of these things have happened. The nature of a false accusation is that it has been proven to be untrue, an unproven accusation is still an accusation, and until they are tested in court or retracted by the accusor they stay that way. If we knew somehow that Galloway's accuser was telling the truth this section would read "Sexual and physical assaults, and defamation lawsuit", and Galloway would (hopefully) be in prison. I'm open to hearing why the word "false" belongs in the section title, but I really can't see any supported reason. SomerIsland (talk) 06:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Popping in here since I just reverted an IP adding the phrase "false" to the section title. I agree about not adding "false" to the section title unless/until the allegations have been definitively proved false, especially since the report by Justice Boyd that editors are using to justifying adding "false" to the title has not, to my knowledge, been released publicly. MerelyPumpkin (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I almost want to request semi-protected status for this page, since its just IP users doing this vandalism. In response to the most recent note, its not even that the report wasn't released: it was an unofficial report done by a retired judge outside the justice system, and it wasn't about whether he did it or not, it was about if there was enough evidence to prosecute. SomerIsland (talk) 23:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

text: *Even the sources covering the report are much more cautious about what it says.  From the Globe and Mail (currently cited in the article):   The article used an unreliable source to describe this as an "exoneration" and framed it in a way that made his firing sound like some unfathomable injustice, which certainly does not match more reliable coverage; the Globe and Mail coverage essentially makes it sound like he was primarily fired for having an affair with a student, but a lawsuit resulted because the way in which it occurred made it seem like more. --Aquillion (talk) 22:43, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the word "False" to describe accusations