Jump to content

Talk:Tobias Madison: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 116: Line 116:
:::As the subject had pleaded guilty in a court (pleading guilty amounts to conviction), this section merits inclusion per BLPCRIME. Dismissal of the case can be mentioned too if it can be sourced to an independent and reliable source. [[User:Alleyrubadeau|Alleyrubadeau]] ([[User talk:Alleyrubadeau|talk]]) 03:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
:::As the subject had pleaded guilty in a court (pleading guilty amounts to conviction), this section merits inclusion per BLPCRIME. Dismissal of the case can be mentioned too if it can be sourced to an independent and reliable source. [[User:Alleyrubadeau|Alleyrubadeau]] ([[User talk:Alleyrubadeau|talk]]) 03:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)


::::{{yo|Wadiseasons}},{{yo|Alleyrubadeau}}, {{yo|Gorlono}}, {{yo|Deepfriedokra}} but we hadve existing RS sources to support this guilty plea. User T.bahamut with a declared COI, has submitted a google drive document, and obviously should not be considered as a source. Why were other people in the conversation not tagged in this discussion? [[User:Joojay|Joojay]] ([[User talk:Joojay|talk]]) 03:15, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
::::{{yo|Wadiseasons}},{{yo|Alleyrubadeau}}, {{yo|Gorlono}}, {{yo|Deepfriedokra}} but we hadve existing RS sources to support this guilty plea. User T.bahamut with a declared COI, has submitted a google drive document, and obviously should not be considered as a source. Why were other people in the conversation not tagged in this discussion? To clarify, I am not of the stance of pushing to add the content back. I am upset with how a unilateral decision was made here with out discussions or votes, and it seems to be a unique handling of this. [[User:Joojay|Joojay]] ([[User talk:Joojay|talk]]) 03:15, 29 December 2021 (UTC)


Hello Alleyrubadeau. This is the subject of this article. The information in the source is incorrect. I have never pleaded guilty to any crime. the case is sealed. attached is the proof: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1omKCAwTeyDsdLmp6GBTeSVef12idC4O8/view
Hello Alleyrubadeau. This is the subject of this article. The information in the source is incorrect. I have never pleaded guilty to any crime. the case is sealed. attached is the proof: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1omKCAwTeyDsdLmp6GBTeSVef12idC4O8/view

Revision as of 03:57, 29 December 2021

Tobias Madison Pleaded Guilty to Domestic Violence (previous title: Domestic violence allegations)

Per WP:PUBLICFIGURE and the section WP:BLPCRIME, removal of crime allegations only applies to individuals who are not public figures - and based on the amount of WP:RS news and articles,[1][2][3][4][5][6] it seems fair to say this is a public figure within the art world. Happy to discuss this further here on the talk page. Jooojay (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Letter calls attention to domestic assault allegations against Swiss artist". www.theartnewspaper.com. Retrieved 2019-10-30.
  2. ^ Durón, Maximilíano (2019-10-08). "Domestic Violence Accusations Against Artist Stir Group to Send 'Letter of Concern' to Swiss Institute [Updated]". ARTnews. Retrieved 2019-10-30. {{cite web}}: no-break space character in |title= at position 103 (help)
  3. ^ "Poet CA Conrad Cancels Appearance at the Swiss Institute in Solidarity With Alleged Victim of Domestic Abuse". Hyperallergic. 2019-10-10. Retrieved 2019-10-30.
  4. ^ "Cultural Figures Call for Swiss Institute to Address Assault Allegations Against Tobias Madison". Artforum.com. Retrieved 2019-10-30.
  5. ^ "Art Industry News: Is the New MoMA Building Too Much Like an Apple Store? + Other Stories". artnet News. 2019-10-09. Retrieved 2019-10-30.
  6. ^ "Group Sends 'Letter of Concern' to Swiss Institute About Artist's Inclusion in Exhibition, Citing Domestic Violence Allegations". thelatest.com. Retrieved 2019-10-30.
The blanking of the "Domestic violence allegations" section is now happening from bouncing IP addresses on different days. Adding a note here incase this article needs protections in the future. Jooojay (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
More blanking of this section is happening, often from bouncing IP addresses. This issue started Oct 30th. Jooojay (talk) 04:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra: could you please discuss these changes you made here on the talk page since you removed an entire section, not seeing the issues you are claiming about poor sourcing or unreliable sources. Jooojay (talk) 05:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We don't present allegations. They are unproven and this content is salacious. Only the highest quality sourcing may be used for negative content, and unproven allegations are harmful to the subject. Please see WP:BLP. Please obtain consensus before adding negative BLP.-- Deepfriedokra 12:00, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra: - We do present allegations in a BPL if the person is a public figure WP:PUBLICFIGURE and it is widely publicized like this one - the section WP:BLPCRIME. A fine example of this is basically every BPL article connected to Me Too movement, Weinstein effect, and Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse allegations. Some further examples: Matt Lauer, Jens Hoffmann, Mario Batali, John Besh, and there are many others. We had a discussion happening on this talk page here and you chose to ignore it and delete the content instead, that is what I am finding problematic. Can you please start a vote, if that is what you think is needed here. Jooojay (talk) 21:54, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to readd the contested content when you achieve consensus to do so. Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra 00:11, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: how are you suggesting I gain consensus? Jooojay (talk) 01:30, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Noticing there is no consensus issues on these other articles, so I don't know what you are looking for exactly or why it's needed for this WP article example only. If I don't hear from you by next week I will add back the content. Jooojay (talk) 07:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Before that, you need to start a consensus seeking discussion here. You need to place notices of that discussion on the talk pages of the WikiProjects listed at the top of the issue. Or you can start a discussion at WP:BLPN. As this discussion has not resulted in other editors supporting you position, you do not have consensus to put that content back. I can't help the deficiencies of other pages on Wikipedia. Perhaps no one has noticed and challenged content that is salacious and tabloidesque.-- Deepfriedokra 17:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Attempts have been made for consensus through editing (the issue was with bouncing IPs and now with Deepfriedokra), through discussion (both on the talk page and on the WP:BLPN. Thus far nobody is attempting to hold any discussion on this topic, including the editor removing the content @Deepfriedokra:. Seems like a consensus is not the concern at this point in time. Jooojay (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, you've no support to add back negative BLP content that has been challenged and removed. -- Deepfriedokra 11:53, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was not the only WP editor adding in this allegation information with sources. I realize you know this since you left messages on @Gorlono: talk page too. As far as I can tell that fulfills a consensus through editing. Jooojay (talk) 22:47, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As of January 2020, this is no longer an "allegation" of a crime since Tobias Madison pleased guilty in court.[1] So there is no consensus issues, but adding a note here incase someone needs more discussion. Jooojay (talk) 21:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

Moving image?

I am confused by the use of this term "Moving image" throughout the article, do you mean to say film? Or conceptual film? Is this a proper name to something specific? Please clarify. Jooojay (talk) 21:41, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources and possible COI edits

Noticing someone added many sources from his various galleries of representation and external links to these galleries, however these are considered primary sources and should all be replaced, see WP:RS. Typically this happens with either new editors, or COI editors such as the gallery representatives trying to edit WP, or editors that are the actual subject of the articles. Adding a note here incase this persists. Jooojay (talk) 21:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the personal section and marriage information since no citations were provided and this is a BPL. Seems like more COI edits. Jooojay (talk) 23:11, 4 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2019

REINSERT: Domestic Violence Charges and Arrest section.

Madison was arrested in March 2019 after his then-partner filed a criminal complaint against him alleging that he had "hit her in the face, struck her head against a wall, and strangled her" in December 2018.[21] She claimed that the incident caused swelling, concussion and "substantial pain" to her, while a friend of the couple corroborated her story.[21]

Since he was arrested on five counts of domestic violence and assault charges, Madison has become the focus of a letter writing campaign to the Swiss Institute at which he again is showing work.[21][22] As a result of these pending criminal charges and allegations against Madison, poet C.A. Conrad cancelled their 2019 planned appearance at the Swiss Institute.[23]

Sources: http://www.artnews.com/2019/10/08/swiss-institute-tobias-madison-allegations/ https://www.artforum.com/news/cultural-figures-call-for-swiss-institute-to-address-assault-allegations-against-tobias-madison-80999 https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/letter-calls-attention-to-domestic-assault-allegations-against-swiss-artist https://hyperallergic.com/521867/swiss-institute-tobias-madison/ https://hyperallergic.com/522091/poet-ca-conrad-cancels-appearance-at-the-swiss-institute-in-solidarity-with-alleged-victim-of-domestic-abuse/ https://www.lequotidiendelart.com/articles/16189-mobilisations-contre-des-artistes-accus%C3%A9s-de-violences-faites-aux-femmes.html Denniswillantonio (talk) 03:25, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. Please establish a consensus to add this text before making the edit request. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:22, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2019

Subject is a public figure. His arrest is a public record in the New York State Criminal Court system. Multiple news sources, Art Forum, ArtNews, The Art Newspaper, Hyperallergic, all reported on the incident. Letter writing campaign is a public document. COI attempting to erase public information widely available on the internet about subject's arrest and criminal charges. Consensus. Criminal charges verified here: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcrim_attorney/captcha COI, recent activity resultant in whitewashing of public information about arrest and charges. Reinstate Domestic violence section. The blanking of the "Domestic violence allegations" section is now happening from bouncing IP addresses on different days. Adding a note here incase this article needs protections in the future. Denniswillantonio (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 23:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Material copyrighted elsewhere

may not be used on Wikipedia. Please do not add such to Wikipedia. Content copyrighted elsewhere must be rewritten from scratch. Content sources must explicitly say "creative commons", "GFDL", or "public domain" to be added to Wikipedia without rewriting. Thanks-- Deepfriedokra 11:49, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you are being vague on this talk page. What are you exactly trying to address re: a copyright issue? I don't see that you took any actions today regarding this. Perhaps the confusion was the quote someone had used in the section titled "Allegations"? Jooojay (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to add domestic violence allegations back to the article

If I am not wrong, we add crime allegations to Wikipedia in such cases where the accused has been to jail? The domestic violence allegations were serious in Madison's case to such an extent that more than 50 artists signed a "letter of concern" [1] [2] [3]. While I agree that the gruesome details of the alleged incident may not be needed, we need to mention the incident briefly due to its seriousness. Gorlono (talk) 08:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Domestic Violence Paragraph

Hello. I am the subject of this article. I ask to have this paragraph removed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_Madison#Domestic_violence

The information both in the article and in the sources is incorrect. A year after the initial court case the Criminal Court of New York dismissed the Criminal Case in its entirety, reduced it to a non-criminal violation and sealed the record from the public. I have the documents to prove all that and would be willing to share a redacted version, should this be necessary. I however do not intend to make any public statements.

Also I am a citizen of both the European Union and of Switzerland. The European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) prohibits under Chapter 2, Article 10: Processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences or related security measures. Additionally under GDPR Chapter 3, Article 16 I have the right to rectification and under Article 17 the right to erasure.

Lastly, I have been happily married in a healthy relationship for the last 2.5 years. On behalf of myself and my partner, I would just like to move on.

Thank you so much for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.bahamut (talkcontribs) 09:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi T.bahamut, thanks for posting your concerns. I just stumbled upon this by accident and see that you have some concerns about WP:BLP issues. I'm an amateur art connoisseur who is somewhat familiar with contemporary art.
Since you have a COI, please make sure not to edit the article.
Per WP:UNDUE, WP:LIBEL, WP:BLPEDIT, WP:BLPKIND, etc.:
"Subjects sometimes become involved in editing material about themselves, either directly or through a representative. The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to BLP subjects who try to fix what they see as errors or unfair material. Editors should make every effort to act with kindness toward the subjects of biographical material when the subjects arrive to express concern."
"Although Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves, removal of unsourced or poorly sourced material is acceptable. When an anonymous editor blanks all or part of a BLP, this might be the subject attempting to remove problematic material. Edits like these by subjects should not be treated as vandalism; instead, the subject should be invited to explain their concerns. The Arbitration Committee established the following principle in December 2005."
As a result, I think it's a good idea for us to follow up on your suggestion and make this a more balanced article. Deepfriedokra should also be supportive of this move.
Thus, I think there is enough of a case for the section to be removed since it's undue and blown way out of proportion. The subject of the article has produced enough notable artwork for us to focus mainly on more encyclopedic content rather than have most of the article focus on WP:BLP1E type coverage. Wadiseasons (talk) 20:29, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, per WP:BLPCRIME:
A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
WP:BLPCRIME says, "editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article" if there is no conviction, and this case has already been dismissed. Wadiseasons (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As the subject had pleaded guilty in a court (pleading guilty amounts to conviction), this section merits inclusion per BLPCRIME. Dismissal of the case can be mentioned too if it can be sourced to an independent and reliable source. Alleyrubadeau (talk) 03:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wadiseasons:,@Alleyrubadeau:, @Gorlono:, @Deepfriedokra: but we hadve existing RS sources to support this guilty plea. User T.bahamut with a declared COI, has submitted a google drive document, and obviously should not be considered as a source. Why were other people in the conversation not tagged in this discussion? To clarify, I am not of the stance of pushing to add the content back. I am upset with how a unilateral decision was made here with out discussions or votes, and it seems to be a unique handling of this. Joojay (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alleyrubadeau. This is the subject of this article. The information in the source is incorrect. I have never pleaded guilty to any crime. the case is sealed. attached is the proof: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1omKCAwTeyDsdLmp6GBTeSVef12idC4O8/view please remove the paragraphh. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.bahamut (talkcontribs) 17:43, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look at both points of view, and am inclined to go with removing the paragraphs per Deepfriedokra. This document, along with some other public records, provide enough genuine documentation and reason for the paragraphs to be removed. The case has now been sealed according to official records. Per WP:BLPCRIME, the paragraphs wouldn't belong here; this is also not a public figure like a major politician or diplomat, and it's undue to focus disproportionately on these kinds of lawsuits and legal cases for minor artists. Of course, T.bahamut, who has declared his COI, should take care not to directly edit the article. Thanks for bringing this up. Wadiseasons (talk) 00:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you wadiseasons. I would like to answer alleyrubadeau: pleading guilty does not amount to conviction in the us. the court still has to accept the guilty plea and the plea has to be consistent with the burden of proof and the standards set forward with that (proofing beyond reasonable doubt). say for example, someone pleads guilty to tax evasion, but the evidence cannot support that, then the person cannot be convicted. otherwise the justice system literally would not work. see for example this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjournment_in_contemplation_of_dismissal — Preceding unsigned comment added by T.bahamut (talk) 12:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]