Talk:Corey Stewart
Latest comment: 7 years ago by 71.203.254.54 in topic Wikipedia in the lead
 | 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.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.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 has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Wikipedia in the lead
Do we really need this? It's in the body of the article, which is fine. I think it's overkill to put it in the lead, and presents a neutrality issue. Coretheapple (talk) 22:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- How is it a neutrality issue? Because it's perceived as having a negative impact on Corey Stewart's image? Is your argument that anything negative shouldn't be in the lead of a BLP? You'll have a hard time with that angle. At this point, it's arguably the second-highest amount of coverage that Stewart has received in US national news in his entire life. Rockypedia (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- You are trying to have 1/3 of the lead reflect one paragraph of the body, reflecting an issue that was reported in the news yesterday. I do not agree with that. 71.203.254.54 (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- That's great. I don't agree that the subject of an article, who has admitted to editing his own page to make it more favorable to himself, can possibly be neutral when evaluating what should and shouldn't be in the lead. In other words, leave this to people that aren't directly involved with the topic in question. Rockypedia (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Let's not assume that this IP user is necessarily the subject or a COI editor (though it may be). He or she is correct that one-third of the lead is excessive. I think the original placement was fine. I hesitate to reinsert as it may be considered a revert. Coretheapple (talk) 23:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- I saw this posted on Jimbo's talk page. i have no connection to this subject. Actually never heard of him before today. 71.203.254.54 (talk) 23:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Let's not assume that this IP user is necessarily the subject or a COI editor (though it may be). He or she is correct that one-third of the lead is excessive. I think the original placement was fine. I hesitate to reinsert as it may be considered a revert. Coretheapple (talk) 23:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- That's great. I don't agree that the subject of an article, who has admitted to editing his own page to make it more favorable to himself, can possibly be neutral when evaluating what should and shouldn't be in the lead. In other words, leave this to people that aren't directly involved with the topic in question. Rockypedia (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- You are trying to have 1/3 of the lead reflect one paragraph of the body, reflecting an issue that was reported in the news yesterday. I do not agree with that. 71.203.254.54 (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Anon IPs editing this page
Given the subject of this article admitting in a CNN interview yesterday that he (or his "campaign") has been editing this page for nearly 3 years, I think it's wise to turn a highly critical eye on any edits made by anon IPs in the coming days. I'm all for anon IPs editing Wikipedia, but when there's clear evidence that a subject is editing his own article, obviously that calls into question the neutrality of any anon IP that shows up during this timeframe and starts spinning info to make the subject appear in a more flattering light. Rockypedia (talk) 23:45, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- Assume bad faith all you want, but please follow policies adding material to a BLP. Namely NOTNEWS, LEAD, UNDUE, WEIGHT, and BLP. 71.203.254.54 (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
- See above. If you have a close connection to the subject, you have no business weighing in here. Thanks for your efforts. Rockypedia (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2017 (UTC)