Talk:We the People (petitioning system)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / Government (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Websites / Computing   
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.
 

Snowden[edit]

The Edward Snowden material is not relevant in this article. Anybody can start one of these petitions, and there has been hundreds, if not thousands, of them. There is no reason at all to list one that hasn't seen a response from the White House, let alone one that hasn't even reached the threshold number of signatures needed to trigger a response.

I'm moving the section here per WP:PRESERVE. I invite the user who is edit warring to include it to come here and make his case per WP:BURDEN.

=== Edward Snowden ===

Edward Snowden, who revealed his identity after making revelations about the existence of PRISM, a top secret surveillance system operated by the NSA, was the subject of a petition to be granted "a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have committed related to blowing the whistle on secret NSA surveillance programs."[1][2] The petition had gathered more than 80,000 signatures on June 17, 2013.[3]

  1. ^ Stableford, Dylan (June 9, 2013). "NSA whistleblower revealed as Edward Snowden, 29-year-old ex-CIA employee". Yahoo! News. Retrieved June 10, 2013. 
  2. ^ Ball, James (June 9, 2013). "Edward Snowden identifies himself as source of NSA leaks – live". The Guardian. Retrieved June 9, 2013. 
  3. ^ Peterson, Josh (June 17, 2013). "Petetion to pardon Snowden passes 80,000". The Daily Caller. 

Federales (talk) 20:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree that if there are many of these so-called "petitions", they shouldn't be covered specifically until or if the President responds. One question: Is every one of the "petitions" responded to, covered here? The two listened certainly got some reportage. Did any others? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, "Anybody can start one of these petitions". But not anybody can get tens of thousands of signatures. Moreover, three media links about the petition are given in the article (in fact, there are more media reportages, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_Snowden&action=history ) . Moreover, the petition is related to the important and very much discussed in media ongoing event. If it is insufficient - what is sufficient? Fangorn-Y (talk) 22:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
And note that while the number of signatures was less (30K), Federales agreed that the petition is significant - he even reverted updated values back to 30K. Fangorn-Y (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
When or if the President responds to it, it might make sense to include it here. Otherwise it's undue weight and advertising. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
The operative word there is "might". It wholly depends on whether the response generates media coverage, and even then the response itself will need to be noteworthy in some respect before it will be worth reconsidering for inclusion in this article. Federales (talk) 00:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Yep. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
In the case of Newtown the only information reflected is that it too got a lot of signatures (though it broke the 100K threshold in less than 24 hours) - Should it go too? WhisperToMe (talk) 08:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm inclined to leave it. The 24 hour fulfillment seems pretty spectacular, and even if there wasn't a direct response, the President did in fact take up the issue. Federales (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Alright. I also wonder just how many petitions do make the 100K in one month deadline. As for Snowden I think whether or not the president takes up the issue there will be coverage anyway (if he doesn't there may be papers which speculate on why he didn't, or explain why he didn't) but I'm going to wait and see WhisperToMe (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── "However, the White House will typically not comment when a petition concerns any investigation which may be ongoing." I don't see any reason to think there will be any speculation, nor is there any reason for additional explanation on why We the People follows its own policy. Federales (talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

It might come as a surprise to people that the White House won't comment (I'll check the actual newspaper articles to see if they do mention the "typically not comment" bit) and I wonder if this will cause analysis or reception to this loophole. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
From HuffPo [1]:
"The White House wouldn't say when its response will come. But it routinely declines to comment on petitions regarding law enforcement matters, including pardon requests. And the ultimate answer is the administration's pursuit of Snowden on espionage charges."
In the absence of a direct response, this may be considered suitable all by itself. Federales (talk) 22:42, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

List of petitions with over 100,000 signatures[edit]

I removed I section named List of petitions with over 100,000 signatures, since it is totally unsourced. I don't know how one could argue that a section named this should exist but at the very least, we'd need secondary sources for each an every entry.TippyGoomba (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree that there is no sensible argument to include such a section. That information is best provided by an external link (which we already have). Federales (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)