Roger Waters is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 6, 2013.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pink Floyd on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pink FloydWikipedia:WikiProject Pink FloydTemplate:WikiProject Pink FloydPink Floyd articles
Re-size large images around to 300 pixels (all "fair use" images), other than album covers (already done).
Articles
Expand all articles to at least Start class. Some song stubs can't be expanded and should be redirected to the relevant album article. Use the "Interstellar Overdrive" article as an example when editing a song stub.
Expand all of the Floyd's studio album articles to at least GA status.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
@GidiD: The content you re-added was clearly challenged, so why did you do that? This is a BLP and an Israeli source is suboptimal for misleading claims which are also undue to lede. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makeandtoss: Well, Haaretz is indeed an Israeli newspaper, but it is still a reliable one, frequently criticizing Israeli policy. But you have also other sources, e.g. The Algemeiner.
Most importantly Roger Waters declares, in his own voice, that there is no evidence for rape of women on 7 October: "No they weren't [raped] ...There was no evidence. You can say anything that you want, but there is no evidence.” here 35:01. As he himself denies that rapes were committed on Oct 7th - this cannot be considered a "misleading" claim, BLP or no BLP. GidiD (talk) 13:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GidiD: Sexual violence includes many things other than rape, he specifically refuted the occurrence of rape, which Patten’s UN report also said it was unsubstantiated; therefore this is not a controversial claim. I did not question reliability of Haaretz, I just pointed out to the conflict of interest being an Israeli source (we all heard of the Israeli government pressure on Haaretz not to publish reports of its intimidation campaign against the ICC prosecutor, to cite one example). Algemeiner is not a reliable source per WP. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makeandtoss. Section 12 of the UN mission report clearly states {{xt|"there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations"}}.
Indeed there is a great deal of evidence for rapes, including testimonies of survivors, forensic evidence, confessions of Hamas militants and many more, reported in RS - I would not repeat the citation in the article's body. Waters says on the interview more than once that there isno evidence - citing this is not a misleading claim. GidiD (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GidiD: "reasonable grounds to believe" and "The absence of comprehensive forensic evidence limited the mission team’s ability to draw definitive forensic conclusions in many instances." Not my point anyway, my point is his remarks could be interpreted in a number of ways, the most controversial of which shouldn't be linked to a non-independent source with a vested interest in the topic, and certainly not in the lede as a highlight of his 80 year existence. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haaretz is an independent source with no vested interest in the topic. I see you are repeating this claim in multiple articles, wherever Israeli newspapers are concerned - As I have suggested elsewhere, you should take this baseless claim to WP:RSN, where some experienced editor will set you straight Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 16:23, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makeandtoss: I would accept your suggestion not to put it in the lede. But the interview with Piers Morgan should certainly be included in the body for the following reasons:
The interview is very relevant to the section about his political viewpoints.
It gained considerable attention in the media and in social media networks.
The interview is well documented.
Waters did claim there is no evidence that rapes were committed;
@Makeandtoss: No need to include the "considerable attention" in the text.
Just between us, as editors, there was a dramatic increase (around 5 fold) in Google searches of "Roger Waters" at the day of the interview. Hence not a marginal interview. GidiD (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
