Ray Saintonge wrote:
The lawsuit here is not a matter of having been so
unfortunate as to be
caught driving drunk pure and simple. The issues relate to how Langan
presents himself to the world in relation to those issues and
organizations which make him encyclopedic and/or notable. The
references to the judgements may very well havew come from his opponents
in the case, but that is not the same as systematically sifting through
court records to find dirt on the guy
This is exactly what makes it original research. You have looked at his
life story, and looked at this lawsuit, and drawn the original
conclusion (perhaps plausible, perhaps even correct!) that the case
reflects negatively on him, showing perhaps something bad about how he
presents himself to the world, etc.
That might mean that the lawsuit would make a fine basis for original
research, to be published as investigative journalism in a newspaper,
magazine, or book.
But it certainly means that it is original research: a novel conclusion
being drawn from primary sources.
I've taken time to think about this before
answering, and I keep
arriving at the conclusion that it is not correct to suppress this
information.
Wikipedia is in no position to "suppress" information. It is in the
public record. Should someone who is working at an institution which is
properly tasked with doing original research want to do so, they are
welcome to do so at any time, and we do not stand in their way.
But the fact still remains that this sort of thing is unquestionably
original research of _precisely_ the kind that we need to avoid for the
obvious reasons having to do with what makes an encyclopedia an
encyclopedia, what kind of resources we have to vet such things, and
what kind of door we open to crackpots, cranks, and POV pushers, if we
came to the conclusion that original research is allowed in Wikipedia,
in case we don't like the person involved. (!)
I had never heard of Langan before this came up.
Going
through the long talk page attached to his article I get the impression
that this guy is a streetfighter who is ready to do whatever it takes to
win his point.
Your not liking him is not a good reason for us to throw out one of our
fundamental policies so that people with an axe to grind can dig up
negative information about him.
--Jimbo