Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 3 as Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez/Archive 2 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Better main photo needed

The main photo for Ocasio-Cortez has poor coloration, low resolution, and shows the subject with an odd expression. Wikimedia Commons doesn't have anything better yet, but once there is something it should be replaced. - Sdkb (talk) 08:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

• There's nothing good on commons right now. This is actually the best one we have. I recommend waiting for an official portrait in the coming months or encourage users to upload NON-COPYVIO (FREE-USE) images to commons. There's already a copyvio in commons as we speak. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

The United States House of Representatives will provide one sooner or later. If a better one (non-copyvio etc) pops up before that, ok, but the present one is not horrible as these things go. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I uploaded a screen grab from a Creative Commons video that might be good for the near future. Let me know if it works!The lorax (talk) 23:19, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

I've looked a couple times for something better. The screen grab isn't really flattering either honestly. It looks like she's having violent stomach pain. GMG^talk 23:33, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Criticisms of Ocasio-Cortez

I feel like this article is overly positive for someone who has encountered so much criticism. She's been accused of not being ready or knowledgable enough for office, as well as too sensational. She was very campaign focused, and struggled with what to do or how to make it even in between winning the election and taking office. She also has made her way onto a number of 'bad economics' forms, and has been criticized heavily for some of her policies. Lastly she is an extreme left (socialist) politician, and her article reads like she's very middle of the road. I came to this article to learn about her, and I feel like if someone just read this wikipedia article they'd have a very distorted picture of what she stands for and what types of opposition she's faced. I'm not sure if this would take the best form as a separate section about her or if it'd make more sense to add more accurate details throughout the article, I'd be interested to hear what you all have to say though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haxonek (talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

It seems to me like your point of view was already established before you came here. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources that discuss criticisms of her, that can be added to the article and summarized neutrally? If so, post links. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Haxonek: It describes her as a socialist at the beginning of political positions. PeterTheFourth (talk) 23:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I've explained to this new editor that socialism is not extreme left (by which I assume he means "far left". Doug Weller talk 12:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

"accused" and "criticized" by who exactly? Trump? Alex Jones? Fox News? and why? because she's not a plutocrat? provide source and we can review them. Acousmana (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Acousmana: I'm sorry if my initial talk came off too strong, I haven't used the talk pages/wikipedia edit much and I'm still getting used to it. Additionally I'm very liberal myself, however Cortez has come under fire a number of times for getting basic facts wrong. She claimed unemployment was low because everyone was working two jobs, she's accused the upper middle class of disappearing (when it's been growing considerably), and a number of other things from the defense budget to suggesting the US population was ~500 million people (here's the washington post criticizing her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2q4cHONB6I, politifact: https://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/statements/?list=speaker, etc). I'm not suggesting we bash her here, however the opposition to her cites her frequent misrepresentation of facts, and unlike most politician pages there is no criticism section for Cortez. Haxonek (talk) 06:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

(Comment) That WaPo video didn't present any substance to back their criticism, plus it's a Youtube video. Her politifact page, a primary source, only has four entries. Per WP:BLP, criticism can be included only if reliable secondary sources present them "responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone". All those accusations would fail these requirements. Inclusion of criticism would be disproportionate at this point, and a dedicated criticism section is actually not a good solution. "Bad economics" is subjective, socialism is nowhere near far left and conservative media painting her as a socialist demon or sth is already noted in article.

If we're going to write something, here is one from Jacobin: [1]. In case this is ever useful. Tsumikiria (T/C) 07:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

"Inclusion of criticism would be disproportionate at this point"! No criticisms allowed! 2604:2000:1580:440E:E961:51F9:B9BD:3714 (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Taking quotations out of context does not help your argument. Do you have a specific reliably-source substantive criticism of her published in a significant third-party site to add? JesseRafe (talk) 18:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

She was widely criticized for labeling Israel as an occupying force, and it should be mentioned. She was also criticized for her response when asked to clarify her statements. Regardless of the accuracy of her statements, they may have gotten enough attention to merit a mention. RadPaper (talk) 13:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Widely? The first link is an Op-Ed and the second one quotes two random people on Twitter. Don't judge articles' content by their headlines, they are often written by other people. JesseRafe (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

The consensus of editors here on the subject of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is very supportive of her and her political advocacy. Not that's there anything wrong with that, it's just a fact that her supporters are just more motivated than anyone to scrutinize anything added into or removed from the article. Expect that there's a lot of the thumbs on the scale to tip a critical edit out of the article for valid Wikipedia reasons at the the discretion of the editors' consensus, especially for "significance" and "reliability of sources" (i.e. "scrubbuing") by a Wikipedian examination of the motives that a secondary source cited is using. Likewise expect thumbs on the scale for inclusion of material that presents her in a best possible way (i.e. "buffing"). In the end, if everyone is editing according to the guidelines, critical material can get into this article, and the halo effect material doesn't. It just may exhaust you to try. patsw (talk) 17:54, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2018

Remove educator from the opening sentence describing who she is. An educator is someone who teaches. She is a politician and has never held a position as a teacher or professor. 174.205.12.226 (talk) 17:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The "early career" section explains her history as an educator. She is not a teacher, and is not listed as one, but she is an educator. DannyS712 (talk) 17:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit Request

From the lede paragraph: "who is an intern for New York's 14th congressional district, having been selected on November 6, 2018." I think you mean "representative-elect", rather than "intern." 96.38.156.2 (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Fixed.The lorax (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 November 2018

This page reeks of fans having written it. I came looking for information on a politician I knew nothing about and now I know only that she's surrounded by a ton of spin. Under "Primary election" it specifies someone not possessing the subject's phone number as proof of "outsider status", which is an unsubstantiated correlation. The lack of a phone number is irrelevant to her biography and the line beginning "In a sign of.." should be removed altogether. At a minimum the first phrase, "In a sign of her outsider status," presuming causation, should be removed. Other issues: in personal info it says she moved to The Bronx, at the end of the article it says she moved to FL. There's repetition about an irrelevant award she won in high school. The article makes a lot of her positive media coverage, so why not more detail about relevant things like this: "Ocasio-Cortez received backlash after barring members of the media from attending her "listening tour" on August 8 in the Bronx and August 12 in Corona, Queens.[76][77][78]". Where are the details about her journey between sitting in on the pipeline demonstration and becoming convinced she was the best person to represent her district two years later? Where is her actual bio? Listen, I'm a liberal reader from VT but the article makes me think that this person is all spin and no substance. 65.96.48.39 (talk) 19:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 15:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Major Vandalism!!!!

I just found this nugget: "When she takes office on January 3, 2019, at 29, Ocasio-Cortez will be the dumbest woman to serve in Congress in the history of the United States.[9] That distinction was previously held by Democrat Maxine Waters.[10] Ocasio-Cortez believes she will be ‘inaugurated’. Wrong.

Currently, Ocasio-Cortez can’t afford an apartment in D.C. She announced this just weeks after announcing that federally funded Medicare for All, free college tuition, and free housing, aren’t “pie in the sky” proposals. These policies would actually cost roughly $42.5 trillion. Her tax proposals to fund this only cover $2 trillion. She has no explanation for the remaining $40.5 trillion. At least we now understand why she believes free housing should be federally funded. If anyone is renting a room in the D.C. area, please contact her via Twitter. We’re not sure where her office is as she probably can’t afford that either."

I don't know how to fix this. Is there a special report option available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.1.166.62 (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

• Fixed by reverting the most recent edit. Pending Changes protected as well. Courcelles (talk) 18:21, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Can we at least use IPA?

I know American people may be more familiar with respelling, but IPA is nevertheless the standard. However my knowledge of IPA is slipping from me, can anyone help verify the following? Thanks.

US: /oʊˈkɑːsioʊ/ Tsumikiria (T/C) 02:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, we can definitely include IPA. But, any spelling featuring prominently in the lead needs to be based on US-English, whether respelling or IPA. This is en-wiki, and a Spanish pronunciation is not appropriate in an article about an American, regardless of their heritage, unless reliable sources in English primarily use a foreign pronunciation; this is very rarely the case. Mathglot (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Also, the Youtube video where she says her name in a campaign ad should be removed as a source and replaced with a better one, because right where you need to hear it clearly, the sound is obscured, and makes it sound like she's mispronouncing her own name. Either her video is right, or this one is; they can't both be right. Mathglot (talk) 04:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

As I've learned as a Wiktionarian, "How To Pronounce" channel videos are sadly unreliable (often wrong), and that one gets her first name wrong. I think the "Courage to Change" ad, in which she says her name twice, is clear enough to use, and our transcription is good. It's fine to also include how she pronounces her name in Spanish, which she also speaks (pronunciation, by an interviewer, here). Other articles on Americans who speak Spanish do often include the Spanish pronunciation, as far as I have seen, sometimes to the exclusion of the pronunciation commonly used in English (e.g., Cesar Chavez's article)! -sche (talk) 04:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I think we can put the English pronunciation first, though. -sche (talk) 05:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The HuffPost article has "Alexandria Oh-CAH-see-oh Cortez" in small text below the picture. There has been some discussion off-wiki about the pronunciation of her name, so I feel Template:Respell is warranted as a supplement (not replacement) to IPA. I'd think the better long-term solution is IPA + audio recording, once we have a reliable source, like on Zbigniew Brzezinski.-Ich (talk) 09:31, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The Huffpost-style respell is accurate for how her name is pronounced in English (American diphthongs, final -z sound), and the ny1noticias interviewer pronounces it accurately in proper, Latin-American Spanish (monophthongs, final -s sound). (Btw, good spot on the Cesar Chavez article, but not few English news readers would pronounce it that way, and the first line should be changed.) As far as her own video, what I hear her saying is "Cor-TAHS" which I think is where the audio must be screwing up. Given her background, surname, and more to the point, the fact that her home country has multiple, major, hispanic television networks that say her name, it makes sense to include the Spanish pronunciation, albeit second. Mathglot (talk) 11:51, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Especially the first time she says her name at the 0:20 second mark of the ad, she doesn't voice the final sibilant very strongly (possibly under Spanish influence?), you're right, but the vowel does sound like /ɛ/ to me, and the final consonant does sound like a (weakly-voiced) /z/ especially the second time she says it (at 2:01). The /ɛz/ is clearer in e.g. [2]. (Some interviewers also voice the -cas-, i.e. /kɑz/, e.g. [3].) As an aside, I'm surprised to see the pronunciation that Sonia Sotomayor's article leads with, after all the hoopla in the news when she was nominated about how "weird" it was [for white people] that her name was stressed on the last syllable; did she change the pronunciation after that? (Edit: I see someone has pointed out on that talk page that it's unsourced. I'll just remove it, with apologies for the digression here.) -sche (talk) 18:32, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

This is not an encyclopedia article

It is an advertisement, with commissars at the ready to delete anything other than worshipful fan letters. 2604:2000:1580:440E:E961:51F9:B9BD:3714 (talk) 17:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Then by all means make a constructive edit suggestion, such as "add abc" or "change x to y" rather than vague pronouncements and remember to discuss the edits, not the editors. Thanks! JesseRafe (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Duplicate info in Early life and Personal life

There seems to be conflicting/repeated information between the "early life" section and "personal life" section. Both mention her father dying, but only the "personal life" section mentions her family moving to Florida after. Also, both sections mention her Catholic faith inspiring her to pursue criminal justice reform. This should somehow be condensed into one of the sections. Sk5893 (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I deleted the Catholic faith info from the early life section. Please do more editing if you feel it needed. Gandydancer (talk) 00:59, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Is her LinkedIn a reliable source?

I'm just wondering, since it's used to support the fact that AOC was in Yorktown HS from 2003-2007. I think there should be other sources for that. Or if not, we can just say she graduated in 2007. epicgenius (talk) 01:12, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Let's just say she graduated in 2007, I found a local newspaper article saying that.The lorax (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Lead photo

I have returned the photo that most closely resembles photos used for our other political articles. I assume she will soon have an "official photo" that we can use. Gandydancer (talk) 16:18, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I personally prefer the "speaking" one seen here [4], but I assume the same so it's a minor issue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Actually I like that one as well but went with the one with the lesser amount of background stuff. Anything rather than the chain-link fence background... Gandydancer (talk) 19:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

+1. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:32, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Not an educator!

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Relations with a minor in economics. The line in her profile that states she is an educator is incorrect. She has no teaching certificate, taken no public education courses, is not qualified to teach in public education, and has never taught any classes what so ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas WTN (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

The body of the article states "She worked as lead educational strategist at GAGEis, Inc. Ocasio-Cortez was also an educator at the nonprofit National Hispanic Institute, in which role she served as the Educational Director of the 2017 Northeast Collegiate World Series, where she participated in a panel on Latino leadership." The references verify that information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Ocasio-Cortez threatened to subpoena someone for criticizing her

I don't know if this is notable enough to be included in the article, but I do think it's worth discussing whether or not it's notable enough.

Her exact words:

I have noticed that Junior here has a habit of posting nonsense about me whenever the Mueller investigation heats up. Please, keep it coming Jr - it’s definitely a “very, very large brain” idea to troll a member of a body that will have subpoena power in a month. Have fun!

Secondary sources for her statement:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ocasio-cortez-trump-jr-democrats-subpoena-power_us_5c0af5b9e4b035a7bf5b2eda

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/donald-trump-jr-dogs-ocasio-cortez-so-she-reminds-president-n945396

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/420301-ocasio-cortez-fires-back-at-trump-jr-keep-trolling-we-have-subpoena-power-next

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/07/ocasio-cortez-trump-jr-subpoena-meme-1050519

Primary source for her statement:

https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1071115755041800192

Archive of her statement:

https://web.archive.org/web/20181207185646/https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1071115755041800192

Claims that her statement violated Congressional ethics laws:

https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/07/ocasio-cortez-violates-house-ethics-rules-threatens-trump-jr-trolling-twitter/

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2018/12/08/ocasio-cortez-violated-house-ethics-and-she-hasnt-even-been-sworn-in-yet-n2537197

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/07/ethics-investigation-into-ocasio-cortez/

Link to House ethics rules:

https://ethics.house.gov/campaign-activity/campaign-contributions-and-contributors

Claim that her statement broke 42 US Code § 1983

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/12/lock-her-up-democrat-ocasio-cortez-broke-42-us-code-%c2%a7-1983-by-threatening-donald-trump-jr-with-retaliation-over-snarky-meme/

I don't know if these sources are sufficient or reliable. Please be on the lookout for other sources if necessary. I just thought this was worth discussing, for possible inclusion in the article.

Lpouer4832xs (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:NOTNEWS and WP:10YT apply. She didn't "threaten" to subpoena Don Jr for criticizing her; she pointed out that he's likely to be subpoenaed for his involvement in Russian collusion. Big difference. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:20, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

OK. Those are good points. Thanks for commenting, and for telling me about those rules/suggestions. Lpouer4832xs (talk) 02:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Her outfit

This wikipedia article currently states:

"Some news outlets, such as Fox News and the Washington Examiner, were criticized for their coverage that mocked Ocasio-Cortez's outfit choices"

That's not really accurate. And it makes those critics falsely look like they were waging a personal attack against her.

The truth is that they said it was hypocritical for her to wear a $3,500 outfit while simultaneously campaigning against income inequality. That is not a personal attack, and it's wrong that the article makes it look like a personal attack.

The article should be changed to reflect this information.

Sources:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/nyregion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-outfit-designer-criticism.html

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/16/18099074/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-clothes-eddie-scarry

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6169791/Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-slammed-wearing-3-500-outfit-pose-construction-workers.html

Lpouer4832xs (talk) 03:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

How is it not a personal attack to pick apart her wardrobe? And what exactly is wrong about her borrowing an expensive outfit she can't afford for a photoshoot? That's pretty standard for photoshoots, only I guess the celebrities that usually get photographed like that can afford the outfits. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2018

Remove reference to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as an "educator" in the first section of her entry. She is not, nor has she ever held a position as a licensed instructor, teacher, professor or any other form of educational professional. 24.233.220.130 (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)