RfC - Is BLP violated by mentioning dropped lawsuit against Diamond?

Can the 2009 libel lawsuit against Diamond be mentioned in the article without violating the WP:BLP policy? If so, how much detail should be included? --Noleander (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Background

In 2008, Diamond published an article in The New Yorker entitled Vengeance Is Ours. In 2009 user User:Rhonda.R.Shearer and others investigated Diamond's research and concluded it was fraudulent and defamatory. Shearer's web site has a page on her accusations here. Shearer's claims led two persons to sue Diamond for libel for $10 million (perhaps Shearer participated in initiating the lawsuit?). The lawsuit never reached judgement, and recently the lawsuit was dropped. A source says it was dropped because of the death of an attorney. Some editors maintain the lawsuit may be revived in the future. Shearer and other editors are attempting to insert material into the Diamond article about the lawsuit. The question is: Can the lawsuit be mentioned in the article, and if so, how much detail should be included without violating the WP:BLP policy?

Comments

• Only a very brief mention, with no details - The BLP policy requires negative material about living persons to be extremely well sourced. The lawsuit alleges that Diamond, a professional author and anthropologist, is a fraud and liar. The lawsuit never reached a judgement, and in fact was recently dropped. Including anything other than the briefest mention of the lawsuit violates the BLP policy. See also WP:Libel which states "It is the responsibility of all contributors to ensure that material posted on Wikipedia is not defamatory. It is Wikipedia policy to delete libelous material when it has been identified." Specifically, giving details about the lawsuit's contents or plaintiffs adds legitimacy to the lawsuit that is not deserved. The fact that Shearer herself, who participated in initiating the lawsuit, is involved in attempts to insert details about the lawsuit, is very unsettling and raises conflict of interest issues. --Noleander (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

• I am in support of Only a very brief mention, with no details if lawsuit is supported by reliable independent or secondary source, and mention or inclusion is not done by Shearer. —JOHNMOORofMOORLAND (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)