Talk:Tony Anthony (evangelist): Difference between revisions

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 page was proposed for deletion by Onesti (talk · contribs) on 18 April 2008 with the comment: No verifiable sources, sources used are interviews etc. No sources on claims of kung fu world champion, no information or sources on supposed killings. It was seconded by Fayenatic london (talk · contribs) on 21 April 2008 with the comment: Delete for lack of reliable sources. I added a link re UK killing in 2000, admitted in his Salvation Army interview part 2; but still no independent sources. An apparently open-minded enquiry on Bullshido.com concluded that this man is a fantasist. The creator of this article removed that link. See talk page. It was contested by 72.145.180.19 (talk · contribs) on 2 January 2012 with the comment: Tony Anthony is a well-known evangelist and author and his Wikipedia page had a removal request from people attempting to harm his story. We are seeking undeletion because there are a number of sources to verify the claims of Tony Anthony and we wish to have those stated on his Wikipedia page.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

I don’t know this man, but an apparently open-minded enquiry on a discussion thread at Bullshido.com, seeking evidence for the claims of “three times world champion”, concluded that he is a fantasist. The creator of this article previously removed the Bullshido link, but it seems fair to include it here on the talk page: http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=60260&page=4

Even if there were reliable independent sources, this person does not seem to meet the notability requirements for Wikipedia.

(For the record I have no axe to grind, e.g. I rescued the article on a better-known evangelist, Rico Tice, from proposed deletion.) – Fayenatic (talk) 16:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s one second-hand explanation proffered as to why there are no records of these “world championships”: “they are highly illegal”. If his grandfather’s school is is not a mainstream martial art but a private matter training in lethal techniques, does it really have “world championships”?

Judging by customer reviews at amazon.com and amazon.co.uk, many (not all) readers and hearers seem to have been moved and helped by this man’s testimony, and I’m pleased to hear that. But it still fails the objective requirements to be kept on Wikipedia. – Fayenatic (talk) 17:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to the un-deletion request made on 2 Jan 2012.
Bearing in mind WP:DEMOLISH, I will not take any further action to delete the article for a while, to give the anon editor time to add the sources that s/he referred to. However, please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. – Fayenatic (talk) 20:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In his book Taming the Tiger Anthony claims to have been a Three Tmes World Kung Fu Champion. There is absolutely no proof of this at all, in fact various Kung Fu Associations around the world have sent written confirmation that they have never heard of him, also they were sent photos of Anthony and no one recognised him.

The Citations in this Article supporting Anthony’s Wiki Page are made by persons and Organisations who have no proof whatsoever of what they are confirming. If they have of course that can posted here, however unsubstantiated articles in Christian Media, Anthony’s own Book or Anthony’s interviews are not proof of events.

Anthony’s Wiki Page was deleted several years ago because of his unfounded claims, now this watered down version has been posted but still is full of deception and lies. He has maintained that the Wiki Pages were deleted because of technical errors, untrue, it was because he could not substantiate any of his bogus claims. – Trueornot (talk, contribs) 21:03, 11 February 2012

The article has just been thoroughly re-written by Erostad (talk). As it stands, large parts of the re-write will have to be reverted as

1. the article should be mainly about the man, but the first para has been written about the organisation; if it meets the notability guideline then it should have its own article, rather than giving excessive info within a biography.
2. the article gives statements of notability without independent citations, e.g. “Master in Kung Fu”. His autobiography is not sufficient for this claim.
3. it uses weasel words about Anthony’s criminal offences.
4. it still fails to demonstrate notability, without which it is liable to be deleted again.
5. independent sources, and info from them, have been deleted without explanation; some of these might indicate notability.

– Fayenatic (talk) 13:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted Erostad’s edits, per WP:BRD. The rewritten article was in serious violation of WP:NPOV and the edits also removed the sources needed to pass WP:GNG. Open to including some of the new material if consensus on this page goes that way. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have recreated this article from scratch as I would suggest the subject is now notable. Whilst there is plenty more than could be done, I have taken care to comply with WP:BLP and other policies, so I would hope it can stand and be improved. SmilingFace (talk) 12:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the decision to re-create the article. As the old one was only deleted for lack of notability & independent sources, I have restored the deleted history of the page. – Fayenatic London 12:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve just reverted some edits by an unregistered user that added some unsourced content. Please remember the verifiability policy is strictly applied to biographies of living persons. If you’re not sure about something, discuss it here first. SmilingFace (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thank, am new to this but have re-edited including links. Hope I have done this in the correct manner. 2.25.103.127 (talk) 11:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

fix
Hello, I’m TonyAnthonyWiki. I am the subject of this article. I won’t edit the page directly because of conflict of interest (see WP:COI). I’m requesting help from uninvolved editors to correct issues that affect compliance with WP:BLP, WP:V, and MOS:LEAD. I’ve kept each request specific, with a reason and proposed wording.

1) Lead, pejorative labelling Request: Remove “serial fantasist” from Wikipedia’s voice in the opening sentence. If needed, attribute that wording later in the article to the outlet that used it. Reason: MOS:LABEL discourages pejorative labels in the lead. WP:BLP requires careful tone. Proposed: “Tony Anthony is a British Christian evangelist and author best known for his autobiography *Taming the Tiger* (2004). His accounts of his early life have been disputed. In 2013 a panel nominated by the Evangelical Alliance stated that large sections of the book were false, a characterisation reported by several outlets. Anthony has rejected the panel’s conclusions and later republished a revised edition.”

2) Lead, “claimed to have been a violent criminal” Request: Remove “claimed” from the fact of imprisonment, and attribute disputed elements elsewhere. Reason: Imprisonment is a matter of record. “Claimed” suggests doubt about a fact. Proposed: “…best known for his autobiography … He served a prison sentence in Cyprus and later became a Christian.”

3) Birth name in infobox Request: Remove the alternative birth name currently stated, or replace with “Known as Tony Anthony” until supported by a high-quality independent source. Reason: Personal details in a BLP must meet WP:V with high-quality sources. Current sourcing is marginal.

4) Early life wording Request: Attribute contested elements to published accounts, not to Wikipedia’s voice. Reason: WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV for disputed claims, WP:BLP tone. Proposed: “According to his books and interviews, he was trained in kung fu by his grandfather, won martial arts titles, worked in close protection, and later became involved in crime.”

5) 1989 Cyprus charges wording Request: Replace specific unsourced charges with accurate but general wording. Reason: Avoid unsourced specifics per WP:BLP. Proposed: “He was arrested in Cyprus and later sentenced to a term of imprisonment.”

6) Missionary nationality and name Request: Change “Irish missionary Michael Wright” to “Northern Irish missionary Michael Wright.” Reason: Accuracy.

7) Spouse identification Request: Replace the full name of my spouse with “his wife,” or remove if deemed undue. Reason: WP:BLPNAME advises caution naming non-public family members, especially where sourcing is local, dated, or inaccessible.

8) “Used a false date of birth” Request: Remove this sentence unless a high-quality independent source is provided. If kept, please note the registrar error context rather than implying intent. Reason: Current sourcing appears to be self-published or marginal, which fails WP:BLP.

9) Balance in “Investigation” and “Subsequent events” Request: Add brief, attributed balance that I publicly disputed the 2013 characterisation and that a revised edition was later published. Reason: WP:DUE and WP:BLP require balanced summarising of significant viewpoints with attribution.

10) Editions and ISBNs Request: Add later editions to the Bibliography/Works section: *Taming the Tiger*, Revised edition, New Wine Press, 2015, ISBN 9781910848005 *Taming the Tiger*, Great Commission Society edition, 2022, ISBN 9781739697600

11) External links and image Request: Consider adding Great Commission Society website in External links as my current organisation, keeping links minimal per WP:EL. I can supply a recent freely-licensed photo via Wikimedia Commons if helpful.

Thank you to any uninvolved editor who can review and implement these requests. I am happy to answer questions and to supply a free-license headshot.

TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 11:37, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: I’ve changed your template from {{edit request}} to {{edit coi}} since you have a conflict of interest. If making a COI edit request, use that template instead. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 12:10, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your first proposed edit “1)” really isn’t appropriate. The fact that the article subject published a book that was presented and marketed as autobiographical, the contents of which are in reality an aggrandising fabrication, is part of what the subject is notable for. It would not be appropriate to remove this vital context from the article summary. Cambial — foliar❧ 12:15, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the request, Cambial. I appreciate your time and input.

My main concern is that the current opening line presents the disputed wording as Wikipedia’s voice rather than as an attributed claim. Per MOS:LABEL and WP:BLP, contentious descriptions about a living person are usually attributed to the source that made them, rather than stated in Wikipedia’s voice.

To be clear, I’m not asking that the criticism or the 2013 investigation be removed, only that it be presented with proper attribution and neutral tone, such as “The Observer described Anthony as a ‘serial fantasist’.”

I’ll leave this for uninvolved editors to consider. Thank you again for your attention. TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 12:36, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You write that the description is contentious. Which reliable secondary sources – news organisations, scholarship, etc – dispute this characterisation? Cambial — foliar❧ 12:49, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the follow-up, Cambial.

There was broad reporting of both the Evangelical Alliance panel’s findings and my formal response disputing them. For instance:

• Christian Today (18 July 2013) – “Tony Anthony responds to Evangelical Alliance statement.”
• Premier Christian News (22 July 2015) – coverage of the revised edition of *Taming the Tiger* and my response.
• For the Sake of the Gospel (Ian Bruce) – publication of the full defence statement with supporting material.

These sources show that the 2013 characterisation was publicly contested. For that reason, my suggestion was simply that the description in the lead be attributed to *The Observer* rather than presented in Wikipedia’s voice, in line with WP:BLP and MOS:LABEL.

I’ll leave this for uninvolved editors to review. Thank you again for your consideration. TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 13:04, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyAnthonyWiki All due respect, I don’t think you can ask Cambial to leave the conversation, nor do I think it’s appropriate. Likeanechointheforest (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Likeanechointheforest. I may have worded that sentence unclearly, my intention was only to say that I would step back and leave the matter for uninvolved editors to review. I appreciate everyone’s time and input. TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TonyAnthonyWiki, I’ve implemented your suggested edits 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8, and partially edit 9. Edits 1, 10 , and 11 are not appropriate. Proposal 1 seeks to position facts, as reported by reliable sources, as merely opinion. Neutrality requires that established facts are presented as facts. In this case a primary fact, key to the subject’s notability, is that the article subject fabricated nonsense about the first twenty years of their life. We follow the framing in the reliable sources. Proposal 10 lacks a reliable source suggesting these are noteworthy. As these are publications by fringe publishers they are not inherently noteworthy. Proposal 11, a publisher that published one book by the subject fails WP:ELNO. Proposal 4 is not sufficiently specific. Please indicate exactly what changes you propose be to the sentences in that section. Cambial — foliar❧ 16:20, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cambial, for making the recent revisions and for attributing the material properly. The updated wording reads much more neutrally and aligns with BLP guidelines. I appreciate your time and care on this. TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following up on the earlier discussion, could uninvolved editors please review the addition of a short, neutrally worded section on Anthony’s humanitarian work since 2022, to provide due weight per WP:DUE and WP:BLP. Sources are independent national media and UN-cluster documents.

Humanitarian and evangelistic work

Since 2022, Anthony has been involved in humanitarian operations in Ukraine through the Great Commission Society (GCS), coordinating volunteers delivering food and evacuation support near frontline regions. In April 2022, the *Daily Express* reported that a GCS convoy “helped to save the lives of more than 400 Ukrainians and deliver 44 tons of humanitarian aid,” quoting Anthony on conditions faced by volunteers.^[1]

Anthony also discussed the Ukraine response on BBC Essex in March 2022 during local radio coverage of the crisis.^[2] GCS participates in the United Nations Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster (FSLC) in Ukraine, with FSLC partner lists and coordination documents identifying GCS among reporting partners.^[3][4][5]

Publications (update)

A revised edition of Taming the Tiger was published in 2015 (New Wine Press, ISBN 9781910848005), and a further edition has been issued by Great Commission Society (2022, ISBN 9781739697600).^[6]

• The proposed text avoids promotional tone, attributes claims, and relies on independent sources (national newspaper; UN-cluster docs).
• The BBC Essex interview citation currently points to an aircheck recording; if an official BBC Sounds link resurfaces, it can replace the YouTube link.

Thank you in advance to any uninvolved editor who can review and implement these additions. — TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:BLP and WP:LEAD, I would like to request that the phrase “serial fantasist” be removed from the opening sentence of the article and instead appear, with attribution, in the section that discusses the 2013 Evangelical Alliance investigation.

Current lead

> “Tony Anthony (born Andonis Andreou Athanasiou; 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist and serial fantasist.”

Proposed revision

> “Tony Anthony (born Andonis Andreou Athanasiou; 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist and author. He became known following the 2004 publication of his autobiography, *Taming the Tiger*.”

Then, within the “Investigation and aftermath” section, the following sentence can be inserted where appropriate: > “In its 2013 coverage of the Evangelical Alliance investigation, *The Observer* described Anthony as a ‘serial fantasist.’”

Rationale

• The current placement violates **WP:BLP** because a contentious label appears in Wikipedia’s own voice without attribution.
• Under **WP:LEAD**, the opening paragraph should summarise key aspects of the subject’s notability (career, publications, humanitarian work), not begin with a disputed characterisation.
• Moving the phrase to the investigation section maintains full transparency, keeps the source, and presents the claim in its proper context.

TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:37, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The reviewer would like to request the editor with a COI attempt to discuss with editors engaged in the subject-area first.

This is a Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) request concerning the opening sentence of the article.

Current lead sentence: “Tony Anthony (born Andonis Andreou Athanasiou; 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist and serial fantasist.”

Issues:

1. The phrase “serial fantasist” is presented in Wikipedia’s voice as an asserted biographical fact. This wording originates from a single 2013 article in The Observer and is a contentious characterisation, not an uncontested fact. 2. Per WP:BLP and MOS:LABEL, contentious descriptions of a living person should not appear in Wikipedia’s own voice and must be clearly attributed to the source that used the language. 3. Positioning this disputed characterisation in the opening sentence gives it improper weight under WP:LEAD and WP:DUE. The Observer quotation already appears later in the article within appropriate context.

Requested revision to the lead:

“Tony Anthony (born 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist and author. He became prominent following the publication of his autobiography Taming the Tiger (2004). In 2013 an Evangelical Alliance panel questioned parts of his account; Anthony and some supporters later disputed the panel’s findings.”

This revision:

• Removes an un-attributed defamatory label from the lead • Retains sourced controversy in a neutral and proportionate manner • Reflects WP:BLP, WP:LEAD and WP:NPOV requirements • Places the Observer characterisation in the correct section where it is already attributed

Given this is a BLP matter, I respectfully request that an uninvolved editor review and implement this correction as a priority.

Thank you.

– TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 11:57, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the label might be constructively re-worded in some way, but the fact of being a fantasist should not be removed from the lead, as this is the chief ground of notability for keeping this article in a general-purpose encyclopedia. The original article on Anthony as a Christian worker was deleted as non-notable; later on, it was the controversy about his false claims that made him famous. The requested wording fails to give due weight to the seriousness of his conduct, and the extent to which it brought disrepute upon Christian evangelism.

Disclosure: having previously edited this article and restored its page history, I am not uninvolved. – Fayenatic London 21:37, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve removed it per discussion at BLPN. It can be restored or (better yet) improved per sources. One main confer was the regional understanding of the term. Pleas chime in at BLPN about this. JFHJr (㊟) 04:11, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The reviewer would like to request the editor with a COI attempt to discuss with editors engaged in the subject-area first.

I would like to request a brief, sourced addition to reflect post-2013 humanitarian and evangelistic work, in order to provide due weight under WP:DUE. At present, the article contains extensive detail on a single controversy but almost no coverage of subsequent public humanitarian activity that has been reported in independent sources.

Proposed section (kept concise and neutral):

Humanitarian and evangelistic work

Since 2022, Anthony has been involved in humanitarian operations in Ukraine through the Great Commission Society (GCS). National media reported on aid deliveries and humanitarian support during the early stages of the full-scale Russian invasion, including coverage in the Daily Express (13 April 2022). Local BBC radio in Essex also interviewed Anthony in 2022 regarding the organisation’s work in Ukraine. GCS participates in the United Nations World Food Programme’s Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster (FSLC) in Ukraine; FSLC documents list GCS as a partner INGO and record its participation in national coordination structures, including representation on the Strategic Advisory Group in 2023.

Independent verification sources include:

• FSLC SAG election minutes, 16 May 2023 (names Great Commission Society as a SAG member):

 https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/fslc_sag_election_meeting_minutes_16_may_2023_en-3.pdf

• FSLC monthly bulletin, September 2023 (lists GCS participation in FSLC SAG):

 https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/fslcluster_bulletin_september_2023.pdf

• FSLC partners list, 2023 (lists Great Commission Society as a partner INGO):

 https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/list_of_fslc_partners_2023.pdf

• GCS partner profile on the FSLC website:

 https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/gcs_-_great_commission_society.pdf

• Daily Express coverage, 13 April 2022 (national press report on early GCS Ukraine response)

• BBC Essex interview (2022) discussing GCS humanitarian activities in Ukraine

Editors may condense this into a shorter summary sentence if preferred. The request is simply that independently verifiable post-2013 public activity be represented so that the article reflects both earlier controversy and later humanitarian work in accordance with WP:DUE, WP:NPOV and WP:BLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

– TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a brief follow-up on this BLP edit request for the lead of Tony Anthony (evangelist). The opening sentence still presents “serial fantasist” in Wikipedia’s own voice, based solely on a single 2013 Observer article, which I believe is not compliant with WP:BLP and MOS:LABEL.

I would be very grateful if an uninvolved editor could review the proposed lead revision above for BLP, LEAD and DUE compliance, or indicate clearly if there is consensus to keep the current wording.

Thank you for your time.

TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following up on this separate request concerning WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. At present the article gives extensive detail about the 2013 controversy but almost no coverage of later humanitarian and evangelistic work which is documented in independent sources (national media and UN-cluster materials).

If any uninvolved editor is able to review the proposed “Humanitarian and evangelistic work” section above, I would be very grateful. I am not seeking to remove criticism, only to ensure that the article reflects both the controversy and subsequent public activity in a balanced way.

Many thanks.

TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Daily Express is a generally unreliable source. We don’t use it here. The FSLC cluster is not an independent news source but an advocacy group or charity listing the groups with which it works. Secondary sources are needed. This leaves us with a tiny segment on BBC Essex, which really does not rise to the level of coverage that might warrant inclusion in an encyclopaedia.

You did list ISBNs: they are from vanity presses/self-published. They are not reliable sources. With no secondary source mentioning republication, these is no reason to include such content. Cambial — foliar❧ 17:43, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cambial Yellowing: the answer is no, and for those reasons. JFHJr (㊟) 04:12, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors,

I am the subject of this article, editing only through declared

channels.

I am requesting the removal of my birth name (“Andonis Andreou Athanasiou”) from both the lead sentence and the infobox on the basis of **WP:BLPPRIVACY**, **WP:BLPNAME**, and **WP:UNDUE**.

The birth name appears nowhere in reliable secondary sources except within: • a small number of articles connected to a 2013 controversy, and • the “Research Group” material, which has long been acknowledged by multiple editors as highly contentious.

There is **no independent encyclopaedic relevance** to the birth name today, and it is **not used publicly**, nor academically, nor professionally. Its continued placement in the lead effectively highlights private information that I have never presented publicly and which does not help readers understand my notability.

Per **WP:BLPPRIVACY**, the birth name of a living person should be included only when:

• “widely published, well-sourced, and relevant to the person’s public role.”*

This is not the case here.

The prominence given to the birth name in both the lead and infobox gives it **undue weight**, especially because: • It relates only to disputed claims from over a decade ago • It is not relevant to my work as an evangelist, author, or humanitarian worker • No major independent source currently uses or foregrounds it

In short, this detail is being given an importance it does not hold in reliable sources.

The name was originally surfaced online during an adversarial dispute. I am respectfully asking that it no longer be presented as though it is a routine part of my public biography. Publishing past private names of living persons is discouraged when the individual does not publicly use that name and when there is **no ongoing encyclopaedic justification**.

This aligns with **BLPPRIVACY** and long-standing discretionary practice by administrators in similar cases.

Lead:

“Tony Anthony (born Andonis Andreou Athanasiou; 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist…”

“Tony Anthony (born 30 July 1971) is a British Christian evangelist…”

Infobox:

Remove the “Born: Andonis Andreou Athanasiou” line and retain only the standard date of birth.

• Remove the unused birth name from lead • Remove the birth name from infobox • Retain the DOB • Keep all existing controversy content fully intact elsewhere in the article • Bring the article in line with BLPPRIVACY, BLPNAME, and UNDUE

Thank you for your consideration. I remain available to answer clarifying questions.

TonyAnthonyWiki

TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 09:09, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you to the administrators reviewing this.

I am requesting an administrative BLP review of the article Tony Anthony (evangelist), following the recent adjustments to the lead. While I appreciate the removal of the un-attributed phrase, several serious BLP issues remain unresolved. These issues now materially affect the accuracy, fairness, and legality of the biography.

I am not disputing the inclusion of criticism. I am requesting that material about a living person comply with Wikipedia’s core BLP policies.

Below is a concise list of the outstanding BLP violations, each supported by policy:

1. Lead sentence states conclusions as fact (“subsequently determined to be a fabrication”) This asserts an unqualified, universal conclusion about an autobiographical work. The actual sources reflect differing characterisations, none of which grant Wikipedia licence to state this as a definitive fact. Per WP:BLP and MOS:LABEL, disputed assessments must be attributed and must not appear in Wikipedia’s own voice. The current lead wording therefore violates WP:BLP, WP:NPOV and WP:LEAD.

2. Identification of my wife (a non-public individual) The sentence “Anthony’s wife received a sentence of 120 hours of community service” violates WP:BLPNAME and WP:UNDUE. She is not a public figure, this personal detail is not relevant to my notability, and identifying a private individual solely in connection with an old legal matter is expressly discouraged by BLPNAME.

3. The source used for this claim is dead and cannot be verified The reference supporting this sentence (“Hit and Run Driver Admits Fatal Crash”) now resolves to a non-existent page with no archival copy available. Under WP:BLP, contentious material that is not verifiable must be removed immediately. A dead link cannot support identification of a private individual or details of their sentence.

4. Broken sourcing in the article more broadly Multiple citations within the article (including those attached to the same event) no longer resolve to live sources. WP:V and WP:BLP require that unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material be removed, not retained until corrected.

5. Undue weight and imbalance within the lead The current lead dedicates its entire structure to criticism and disputed elements while omitting all other areas of public notability, including: • Humanitarian work in Ukraine reported by national media • Interviews and broadcast appearances relating to humanitarian operations • Verified participation in United Nations Food Security and Livelihoods Cluster structures

Per WP:LEAD and WP:DUE, the first paragraph must reflect the subject’s broader public activity, not exclusively one area of criticism.

6. Long-standing BLP instability Historic deletion discussions, concentration of negative-only sources, and persistent imbalance on the Talk page indicate that the article may benefit from uninvolved administrative oversight to restore compliance with WP:BLP, WP:NPOV and WP:LEAD.

Request I respectfully request that an uninvolved administrator:

• Review and correct the remaining BLP violations listed above • Remove the sentence identifying my wife, in accordance with WP:BLPNAME and WP:V • Replace or remove dead and unverifiable sources in accordance with WP:BLP • Ensure the lead reflects neutral, proportional coverage of all significant aspects of notability

Thank you for your time and for safeguarding Wikipedia’s BLP standards.

User: TonyAnthonyWiki TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It took all of 10 seconds to fix point 3. FDW777 (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding point 2. You were both charged, and pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice at the same trial in relation to the same incident. Her inclsuion seems wholly relevant. FDW777 (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello editors, and thank you to those who have been reviewing earlier requests. I am continuing to make focused, policy-based edit requests as advised.

This request concerns several statements in the article that are sourced to links which no longer work or no longer contain the information they are cited for. Because these are serious claims about a living person, I would appreciate help from independent editors in reviewing them under WP:BLP and WP:V.

1. The link currently used for the “Hit and run driver admits fatal crash” citation resolves only to a closed news site (“Sorry you can’t find what you’re looking for”). As the source no longer provides the headline or article content, it cannot verify the sentence it is attached to.

2. The link describing community service leads only to a generic definition page. It does not verify the statement about the sentence given to my wife, who is a private individual. WP:BLPNAME requires especially careful sourcing here.

3. Some older links in the “Investigation” section no longer display their original full content or only show partial reproductions. I would be grateful if editors could review whether each of the disputed factual claims still has a functioning, independent source behind it.

I am not asking for any sourced criticism to be removed. I am only asking that any statements supported by dead links or non-verifying sources be checked and, if necessary, removed or re-sourced in line with WP:BLP.

Thank you to anyone who can assist. TonyAnthonyWiki (talk) 17:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Point 1 has already been fixed before your second post post here. If you continue to make duplicate posts it is only making the job of other editors more difficult, please read WP:IDHT and WP:BLUDGEON. FDW777 (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]