Talk:Wendy Rogers (politician): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:11, 1 November 2021

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.

Biography: Politics and Government Unassessed

	Biography portal 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 not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Arizona Start‑class Low‑importance

	Arizona portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arizona, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Arizona on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArizonaWikipedia:WikiProject ArizonaTemplate:WikiProject ArizonaArizona articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Referring to Oath Keepers as an Anti-government Organization

The first problem I notice with the article is what I would call a misrepresentation of the Oath Keepers organization as being anti-government. This seems extreme - especially as the very name of the organization delimits it to being PRO-government, that is, provided we're talking about the US Government, having the US Constitution as its basic law.

To pillory such a large organization (which is highly respected in some-circles, by a broad swath of the population) by misrepresenting their most basic tenet, leaves a bad taste in a lot of our mouths.

In the interest of neutrality I would remove it.2603:7000:C901:5F00:C1BE:4026:A63D:2EF7 (talk) 21:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the first sentence of Oath Keepers. soibangla (talk) 21:16, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

== Referring to her court case as being hagiographic is a big stretch. She won the case, plain and simple. It is neither positive or negative, it is just the verdict. Why are you fighting to remove the results of the case? It is the same as getting a test results for having the flu, it is not flattering or derogatory, it is just the results of a test. As you shoot down anything that is remotely positive about her, it seems very obvious to me that you want to do her as much damage as possible I am just trying to state factually what she has and has not done.

I still feel this biography needs to be taken down as it is clearly only meant to be a hit piece. SterlingSpots (talk) 16:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)SterlingSpotsSterlingSpots (talk) 16:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 In the interest of neutrality I would remove it.[[Special:Contributions/2603:7000:C901:5F00:C1BE:4026:A63D:2EF7|2603:7000:C901:5F00:C1BE:4026:A63D:2EF7]] ([[User talk:2603:7000:C901:5F00:C1BE:4026:A63D:2EF7|talk]]) 21:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 :Please read the first sentence of [[Oath Keepers]]. [[User:Soibangla|soibangla]] ([[User talk:Soibangla|talk]]) 21:16, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
+== Referring to her court case as being hagiographic is a big stretch. She won the case, plain and simple. It is neither positive or negative, it is just the verdict. Why are you fighting to remove the results of the case? It is the same as getting a test results for having the flu, it is not flattering or derogatory, it is just the results of a test. As you shoot down anything that is remotely positive about her, it seems very obvious to me that you want to do her as much damage as possible I am just trying to state factually what she has and has not done.
+I still feel this biography needs to be taken down as it is clearly only meant to be a hit piece. [[User:SterlingSpots|SterlingSpots]] ([[User talk:SterlingSpots|talk]]) 16:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)SterlingSpots[[User:SterlingSpots|SterlingSpots]] ([[User talk:SterlingSpots|talk]]) 16:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)