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 sourced must 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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please discuss the wording of the last paragraph of the controversy section here to make it NPOV. Currently it reads as follows.
The fine was of exceptionally dubious merit, as there was no overt obscenity during the segment and Segal had acted in good faith believing the callers to be 18. It is believed that there may have been political strings pulled by the administrators of the school in order to preserve the school’s public image. This was especially important so as to conceal the truth, as several independent investigators have largely corroborated the caller’s claims of sexual debauchery on school grounds.[5]
-- DBishop1984 18:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Seems this paragraph as sprung up on Elliot in the Morning as well, I've removed it and noted that it was being discussed here. -- DBishop1984 15:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Removed paragraph after 1 month with no discussion from 66.101.238.105 ( talk · contribs). -- DBishop1984 18:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)