A fact from Nat Williams appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 July 2008, and was viewed approximately 0 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I'm removing "at least" from the controversies section. We would know if there were any more, it's not like sheriffs going to jail is secret stuff. Either "3 prior sheriffs and one deputy were put to jail" is a true or a false statement. There is no ambiguity. As it is now, it sounds like the facts were badly looked up, but the artcicle has references to all four cases. 78.69.107.97 (talk) 08:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
