Stock car racing:Biographies of living persons

Editors should take special care when adding biographical material on living people to any  article. This material is highly sensitive, and must conform strictly to the 3 main content policies
 * Neutral point of view
 * Verifiability
 * Stock car racing is not a reliable source

content may violate the laws of the country or jurisdiction from which you read the information. is legally subject to the federal and state laws of the United States of America as indicated in their terms and conditions of use. Other countries may have different laws on the expression or distribution of the information. does not promote the violation of any law, and cannot be held responsible for the violation of any law if you link to this domain or use, reproduce or publish the information contained herein.

This policy applies equally to biographies of living people and to biographical material about living people in other articles. The duty to provide the evidence for any edition in, but especially those referring to living people, belongs to the user who adds or restores the material.

Rationale
is a highly visited and consulted site, which means that the material that is published about living people can affect their lives, those of their families, colleagues and friends. Biographical material must be written in strict accordance with content policies.

This policy sets the minimum standards that editors can expect when writing about them, and when they complain about edits.

Writing style
Living biographies should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in an encyclopedic and neutral tone. Although a strategy of eventualization may be applicable in other subjects, very poorly written biographies of living people should be made into stubs or deleted.

The article should document, in a non-partisan way, what reliable tertiary information sources have claimed about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the person has published talking about themselves. The writing style should be neutral and fact-based, avoiding both underestimations and overestimates. Trivia sections should not be included: such information should be integrated into the body of the article.

Reviews
Critics' views should be represented if they are important in establishing the subject's notability and can be attributed to reliable secondary sources, and as long as the article is not overwhelmed by them or appears to side with the critics. Be careful not to give a disproportionate space to criticism, to avoid the effect that a minority opinion may appear as the majority. If the criticism represents the criteria of a minority group, or the user's personal impression, it has no place in the article. Care must be taken with the structure of the article to ensure that the entire presentation is broadly neutral, in particular the hierarchy of titles for sections or subsections should reflect important areas in terms of the notability of the person.

The content must come from reliable sources and be specific to the person named. Be wary of claims that may rest on guilt by association. Editors must also be vigilant to prevent the inclusion of biased or malicious material about living people. If someone seems to be following an ideological agenda or editing according to a certain point of view, insist that reliable independent, third-party sources are presented and that they demonstrate the relevance of the facts to the person.

Categories
The categories do not carry clarifications or errata, and their use must be fully justified from the content of the article. The article must state the facts that result in the use of the category, and these facts must be referenced.

Great care should be taken with categories that might suggest that the person has a bad reputation.

Categories that classify people based on their religious beliefs or sexual orientation should be used only if:


 * The person publicly identifies himself with said belief or orientation.


 * The person's sexual orientation or beliefs are relevant to their public activity or notable activities, according to reliable published sources.

Trusted sources
Live people material should carefully check the sources of your information. Without reliable independent third-party sources, a biography could violate Verifiability policies and that   is not a reliable source, and could motivate defamation lawsuits.

Material that can only be found from questionable sources or sources of questionable value should be used with care, and if disapproving not used at all, neither as sources nor as external links.

Material from self-published books, fanzines, internet pages in free spaces or blog s should not be used as a source, unless it is developed by the referenced person himself.

Editors should avoid repeating rumors or gossip. Ask yourself if the source is reliable, if the material is presented as true, and even if it is, if it is appropriate for an article on the subject of an "encyclopedia." When a publication that is not entirely reliable publishes information that it suspects is not true, it uses expressions that allow it to "suggest", to make things understood, without affirming them openly, since in the event of possible claims they would argue that they had not made any affirmation. Look for this. If the original publication itself does not trust the veracity of its own story, why should we?

Editors should be careful to monitor the emergence of attribution circles, in which a news outlet talks about unsourced information provided in a article, and then this article attempts to cite that outlet as a source to support the original speculation.

Remove offensive material without good sources
Editors should remove any offensive material that does not have sources, comes from sources that do not meet the standards of verifiability, or is a conjectural interpretation of what a source said (Original research should not be made). The content may be reinserted if it complies with these policies.

These principles apply to all biographical material on living people found anywhere on, including user pages and talk pages. Librarians can enforce removal of such material using article locks or protection if they deem it necessary, even if they are editing the article themselves. Publishers who reinsert material can be warned and blocked.

Librarians who come across an unsorted, negative-tone biography, of which there is no neutral version to which to revert the article, should proceed to delete it directly

Use of the subject as an information source
Self-published material should never be used as a source, unless it is published by the subject of the article. They may use personal pages, blogs, press releases, etc. to provide information about themselves.

Material that has been self-published by the subject of the article can be used:


 * if it is not controversial;
 * if he is not exaggeratedly self-praising;
 * if it does not include implications for third parties;
 * if it does not include implications for events not directly related to the subject;
 * if there are no reasonable doubts as to who the author is;
 * if the article is not based primarily on such sources.

This does not apply to autobiographies published by trusted tertiary publishers: these are treated as a trusted source, as they are not self-published.

A blog or personal page self-published by the subject of the article can be used as an external link, if it is not used as a source.

Regarding editions of the subject of the article
On some occasions, the subject of the article could be involved in the editing of the article, either directly or through representatives. While advises against  writing autobiographies or expanding them significantly, the subjects of the article are invited to remove vandalism, material without sources or with poor sources.

Anonymous edits that wholly or partially whitewash a biography of a living person should be carefully evaluated. Where the subject is of ambiguous relevance, such edits should not be treated as vandalism in the first instance, and users patrolling Recent Changes should always keep in mind that they may be dealing with the subject of the article. The use of inflammatory edit summaries or vandalism notice templates in the discussion should be avoided.

Respect for privacy
An important criterion when writing biographies about living people is: "Do no harm". is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid or gossip magazine, and it is not our goal to be sensationalists or to operate as the prime mover of rumors about people's lives. Biographies should be written conservatively when it comes to privacy.

When writing about a person who is notable for one or two events, including every detail of them can lead to problems, even if the material is very well referenced. In the best of cases it can lead to a little encyclopedic article. At worst, it may be a violation of our neutrality policies. In doubt, the biographies should be reverted to a completely referenced, neutral version that remains on the subject of the article.

Editors should be especially careful when considering whether adding the names of private living persons who are not directly related to the subject of the article provides significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of the relatives of the subject of an article and of other persons tangentially related to it without independent notableness is consequently stronger.

In all cases where redaction is considered, editors should be willing to debate the issue in the article discussion.

Semi-protection and protection
When in doubt, biographies should be reverted to a version that is neutral, sourced, and focused on the topic. Librarians who suspect malicious or partisan editing, or have reason to believe this policy may be violated, may protect or semi-protect the article after removing the controversial material.

BPV erasure standards
When closing a argumentation deletion query on a living person whose notability is ambiguous, the closing librarian must consider whether the subject of the article has requested that it be deleted. There is no consensus on how much weight should be given to the wishes of the subject; the librarian may exercise her own discretion on this matter. After deleting a live biography, editors should seriously consider moving information to another article, but should remember that this policy applies to all Wikipedia pages; Editors should never move material from a deleted biography of a living person as a means of defeating the goal of deletion from the page. Additionally, when merging content from a living person bio, publishers must preserve the contribution history in accordance with GFDL.

Disputed deletes
Librarians must have consensus before restoring pages that have been deleted under the premise of constituting violations of this policy, and if possible they should discuss the situation with the librarian who carried out said deletion. Such a librarian should be prepared to justify her decision, perhaps by email if the situation is sensitive, and librarians and editors who object to a deletion should remember that the librarian who decided to do so may know more specific details that others may not know.

Locks
Publishers who repeatedly add or restore disparaging material about people that have no sources or are poorly referenced may be blocked for disruptive behavior.