Talk:Madison Cawthorn

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.

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.

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.

Biography: Politics and Government C‑class

	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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics: American C‑class Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: North Carolina C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

U.S. Congress C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has not yet been assigned a subject. The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", or "Events".

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 24, 2020	Articles for deletion	Redirected
July 14, 2020	Deletion review	Overturned

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Article is politically slanted

It's obvious the editor/ author is slanted. Everything they say maligns Mr. Cawthorn. 2603:8000:8E01:D02:5CA5:45B8:B707:B81A (talk) 15:36, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How so? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The comment already indicated how so. It is completely negative and editorialized with such unimpeachable sources as Buzzfeed to support unsubstantiated claims and other slander that could only be posted by anonymous editors working behind the shield of a platform. One only needs to compare an article about a controversial figure from the party that you support to see the difference. But the upshot is that Wikipedia's reputation is damaged more than Cawthorn's. And the discourse of Wikipedia bias extends to a founder of the website. If you put your integrity behind articles of this despicable quality, you have none. At the end of the day, he will continue to be the youngest congressperson, while you will be happy with your little barnstars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.71.28.174 (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. Most of this article is hardly neutral. For example, calling someones views "conspiracy theories" implies that they should be dismissed without being considered or examined, and that the person in question is kinda nutty. Even people with kinda crazy ideas aren't treated or talked about like this, especially in a neutral setting.2603:8080:BA01:2293:4EED:B60D:B60E:2CC3 (talk) 16:59, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've going to have to give us specifics backed up with WP:RS and not compare this article to any others as nobody else is Madison Cawthorn. Also don't bother bringing up discredited former "founders" of Wikipedia who have had no involvement with this site for two decades, let alone anything to do with this article. "Conspiracy theories" have been considered and examined and so now can be dismissed, yes, that is what conspiracy theories are. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I’m just reading this article now and I agree it feels a little slanted. For example the phrase “As a congressman, he focuses on messaging instead of legislation.” In the lede feels slanted and also I don’t know what that means. How can we explain the way that he does a lot with messaging rhetoric and also make a claim about that in comparison to his legislative record. I skimmed the source so maybe he admits that this is his thing. But we should have an attribution to what that means.

I agree that there is also a lot of weight put on the things he has done that are related to sexual assault and white nationalism. Hopefully more motivated people can flesh out the rest of what his history. 02:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.43.53 (talk) 152.3.43.53 (talk) 02:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC) 02:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC) 02:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)~[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 February 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove his age because it is out of date. Birthdate is enough. Dreed503 (talk) 02:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. I don't see a reason to remove the age. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The {{Birth date and age}} template is standard for infoboxes, and it updates the age automatically. —C.Fred (talk) 04:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Politically Biased. Not Objective.

The contributors to this article explore every possible angle of Cawford’s alleged sexual assault history and ties to white nationalism in exhausting detail.

But spend very little time reviewing his rise to prominence in politics and his political stances. Topics that should be at the forefront of an article on someone in Congress.

This article is more a defamatory “hit job” and an objective accounting and biography of Cawford’s life. 2600:387:C:7010:0:0:0:C (talk) 22:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC) ‘’ I think that is true. It would be great if you could add more to that area about his rise etc. that way it isnt more heavily weighted to the other stuff[reply]

02:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.43.53 (talk)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 March 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

You may want to mention in his "Personal Life" section that on March, 3, 2022 he was arrested and charged with driving with a revoked licence after previously being pulled over for speeding twice. Sunnyboi18 (talk) 09:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 💜 melecie talk - 10:02, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Many news articles describing this, I tried to keep it fairly brief. -- M.boli (talk) 13:02, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 March 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Führer" should not simply be described as "a German term meaning "leader"". While this is true, it pretty much always refers to Hitler. The text should read "In the post, he called Hitler Führer, Hitler's official title (meaning "leader" in German), and called the site a place of "supreme evil"." Thanks! QueenofBithynia (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done I agree. The main point of the incident is that Cawthorn referred to Hitler by his official title. I used alternate language, but tried to be clear on the point. -- M.boli (talk) 19:23, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 March 2022 (2)

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at Madison Cawthorn. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Every reference to allegations made against Cawthorn should have "without evidence" added to them, or the "without evidence" added to Cawthorne's allegation of election rigging/fraud should be removed, as adding that modifier only to one shows unreasonable bias against him. 206.195.157.47 (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]