Discussão:Bibo Bergeron

Biografias de pessoas vivas

Receba as boas-vindas à Wikipédia. Agradecemos as suas contribuições. No entanto, tenha em atenção que, segundo a política da Wikipédia sobre informação biográfica de pessoas vivas, tais não podem ser difamatórias. Quaisquer afirmações controversas sobre uma pessoa viva que sejam adicionadas em qualquer página da Wikipédia devem incluir fontes. Obrigado(a).

apologies, but my first language is english so I am going to write here first and then use the google translate to write in portuguese.

I am looking for editors to review the articles that have been posted starting january 2020.

Estou à procura de editores para rever os artigos que foram publicados a partir de janeiro de 2020.

The news sources are from tabloid new, they contain wild accusations that are unrelated to the police questioning of this case - and in fact no journalist with integrity has written anything about this case because there has not been a public announcement. all of the sensationalized headlines connect back to one article which is filled unverifiable accusations. I request that these articles not be used as sources. Sensationalism is a type of editorial tactic. Events and topics in tabloid news stories are selected and worded to exicte the greatest number of readrs and viewers. this encourages biased and emotionally loaded impressions of events rather than neutrality, and causes manipulation to the truth of a story. tabloids have a long and documented history of publishing misrepresentations, fabrications, half-truths. exaggeration and introduces non-factual elements. Accredited journalists must meet certain standards of quality, including ethical publishing practices. only reliable sources should be used. not unreliable sources.  

This is a living person bibliography. Poorly source material in an article might damage the reputation of living people or existing groups, and must be removed acording to wikipedia rules.

Esta é uma bibliografia de pessoa viva. Um material de má fonte num artigo pode prejudicar a reputação de pessoas vivas ou grupos existentes, e deve ser removido das regras da Wikipédia.

unless an article from a major newspaper - not a tabloid like "the sun" or "marie claire" or an entertainment magazine or industry insider magazine - but an actual accredited news agency with journalistic integrity - until a real news source writes on this story it has no place on wikipedia.

Ethics of Journalism, which recommends that journalists respect the presumption of innocence, in particular in cases that are still sub judice.

All of the articles posted refer back to one article that relys on "unidentified sources". Todos os artigos publicados remetem para um artigo que se baseia em "fontes não identificadas". I've researched the source and at this time it is not clear what the true charges are, as the articles include many unverifiable accusations and appear to be rigged sources.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid ; this project is not intended to be sensationalistic or a way to spread rumors about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical information about living people is to "do no harm".

A Wikipédia é uma enciclopédia, não um tabloide; este projeto não se destina a ser sensacionalista ou uma forma de espalhar rumores sobre a vida das pessoas. Uma regra importante do polegar ao escrever informações biográficas sobre pessoas vivas é "não fazer mal".

The content of Wikipedia biographies can affect the lives of the people concerned. These articles must be written with care and all information must respect neutrality of point of view , verifiability and avoid any new work .

A biography of a living person (BPV), and by extension any biographical information of a living person on any Wikipedia page, should be compiled by contributors with the utmost care , having regard to the privacy of the subject and of his relatives. Such information is highly sensitive and must strictly follow content conventions based on the principles of encyclopaedia ( citation , verifiability , unpublished works …). Dragonnchild (discussão) 05h00min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

No need to translate it to talk with me, @Dragonnchild. You claim that the content about his prison after being charged with rape should be removed due to the sources being "tabloid-like", correct? Solon ^26.125 06h11min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

There is no doubt that the event received significant coverage in multiple terciary sources, in various languages including Portuguese. My idea would be to keep the information, also including the statement from his defenders that claimed his innocence. Solon ^26.125 06h21min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

I included the statement. Solon ^26.125 06h29min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I believe the most essential requirement of wikipedia is that the articles must be factual.

The significant coverage in multiple terciary sources are all based on one original article written in an online blog. a cartoon journal (the first reference). all other articles use that one blog as the main source.

the content is by amateur writers paid by page views and other factors, and are effectively self-published, user-generated content that lacks editorial oversight. Online blogs are opinion-driven and subject to all kinds of external interests and speculation.

None of the accredited news agency have picked up the story. it has not gone to court in the past 2 years. possibly the charges were dropped after questioning. courts only have 18 months to press charges or they are dissolved. "Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim.

The idea expressed in Eventualism—that every Wikipedia article is a work in progress, and that it is therefore okay for an article to be temporarily unbalanced because it will eventually be brought into shape—does not apply to biographies. Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times.

The english wikipedia page removed the same articles. see the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bibo_Bergeron Dragonnchild (discussão) 11h54min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

@Dragonnchild, could you send here the link to the article on this online blog that you mentioned? Solon ^26.125 15h31min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

https://www.3dvf.com/eric-bibo-bergeron-mis-en-examen/

in this article "Nous tenons ces informations d’une source proche du dossier dont nous préférons protéger l’identité." (whose identity we choose to protect.)

it links to this article: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/artist-rights/report-road-to-el-dorado-and-shark-tale-director-bibo-bergeron-indicted-in-france-184672.html "According to an unidentified source" "Cartoon Brew has independently confirmed that there have been allegations against Bergeron."

This article in states that she was his student - which is impossible. He was never a teacher. This detail repeats in other sensationalized tabloid news sources: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10747440/director-arrested-rape-me-too-french-film/

https://revistamonet.globo.com/Filmes/noticia/2020/01/diretor-e-animador-de-filme-indicado-ao-oscar-e-preso-por-estupro-apos-vitima-se-suicidar.html

this article states "arrested on a rape charge after his victim committed suicide" it is a huge assumption without verifiable evidence. no prosecution would release that information before announcing a trial.there is no journalistic integrity

This type of information news reporting only encourages Media bias or emotionally loaded impressions of events, rather than Journalistic objectivity / neutrality and Media manipulation to the truth of a story. Dragonnchild (discussão) 17h36min de 22 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

@79a, M.a.salgado11, DarwIn e Nyvak: pingando os três primeiros porque participaram de uma situação semelhante no mês passado, e Nyvak porque criou o verbete com a informação que é o centro da questão aqui. Dragonnchild D​ C​ E​ F afirma que a notícia da acusação e prisão de Éric Bergeron por abuso sexual provém de fontes não confiáveis e que fere WP:BPV. Ele enviou os links que seriam a origem da notícia, e a busca por data que fiz no navegador confirma que o en:Cartoon Brew foi aparentemente o primeiro a postar a informação, em 12/01/2020 - Dragonnchild afirma que a fonte é semelhante a um tabloide, e a partir daí a informação teria sido replicada em outros sites de notícias sobre entretenimento em diversos países, mas não aceita por agências de notícia confiáveis. As fontes usadas na versão lusófona são da Monet e do Observatório do Cinema. Vocês consideram que as fontes que originaram e replicaram a informação não são confiáveis, como afirma Dragonnchild para embasar sua remoção, ou esse problema não ocorre e o trecho deve ser mantido no verbete? Solon ^26.125 00h40min de 23 de fevereiro de 2022 (UTC)

until the articles have been investigated they should be removed. again since it is detrimental and this is a living person and we must be fair at all times. Dragonnchild (discussão) 05h44min de 1 de março de 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the statement at this time. I have done the research and these sources do not qualify for wikipedia. Dragonnchild (discussão) 05h51min de 1 de março de 2022 (UTC)

now I will try to translate that using the google translator..