Talk:Orly Taitz

Starting over

I've archived the past discussions. Let's start fresh and critique the article from the current state and move forward. Jclemens (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

where did you archive them? I cannot find the link that is customarily on this page. User:Smith Jones 20:10, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Here they are. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion of the merits of Taitz' theories

Should the article include detailed discussion of the refutation and critiques of Taitz' theories?

• Pro: Mentions could be construed as endorsements
• Con: It might result in significant duplication of the contents of Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories

What does everyone think? Jclemens (talk) 05:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Mention - yes. Her lawsuits based on birther theories are her road to media attention and notability. Without those she'd be just another person with decidedly odd views. Given that, it makes sense to keep the details at the Obama article, where most people would generally go looking for those. Here, mentioning they exist, cover the broad argument and the eventual result (if settled) is all that should be present. This article is about Taitz (who filed the suits), not the lawsuits. If it was just about the lawsuits, we wouldn't have this article. Not having them in the article would look pretty bad for the same reasons. So a mention of the case, and direct readers to the Obama article. Ravensfire2002 (talk) 06:49, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I think we should sick with the "Taitz asserts this" format, which is what the article is about. If Taitz asserts the world is flat, we don't have to discuss the merits of the issue. PhGustaf (talk) 14:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

we could link to the Barack Oama citizenship conspiracy theories thread, and only briefly summarize that taitz related material from that area, like we do in every other article that intersects with another article. User:Smith Jones 20:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

There's no citation for the statement, "She is also known as the crazy bitch who need to go get a life, and stop coming up with idiotic conspiracy theories." I'm just sayin'...

I think they should be mentioned - without them she would not be an entry here at all. However, I think the October 13 Federal sanction against her is helpful because it allows there to be a source behind just saying she's nuts. Now its been officially ruled that she's nuts by a judge. I made changes that moved a sentence about that to the abstract, and elaborated on it in the text... this will allow a mention of what her crazy theories are, but to say - hey, she's been deemed officially insane by a federal judge in Georgia.--Beersquirrel (talk) 04:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

- Mention how she is also a racist and possible anti-Semite - BigFrank360X (talk) 09:32, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Her Religion

Does anyone know what Miss Taitz's religion is?

She was born into a Jewish family and sent at least one child to Hebrew school, but there don't seem to be any sources about her current practice. PhGustaf (talk) 19:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Please remember to respect WP:BLP in this matter. A living person's religion does not belong unless it's significant to their primary cause for notability, or they publicly self-identify as such. Ray^Talk 16:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

While in general I don't think religion should be relevant here, I don't have an issue with mentioning her religion, because she brings it up a lot, and uses the Holocaust and Pogroms as a way of using her Judaism to shield her from criticism, which is pretty sick... In addition, its pretty standard to include ethnicity and religion in biographical information. I would, however, like to see documentation of her religion... she gained citizenship to Israel by claiming she was Jewish. She was supposedly sent to live with an Uncle who was also allegedly Jewish. However, many Soviets claimed Jewish ancestry (real or contrived) in order to escape the USSR and gain access to western states. Because Judaism was illegal in the USSR, it was an ethnic linkage, though not a religious observance for most. Thus, many Russians have some Jewish ancestry. Anyhow, she also likes to invoke Holocaust references a lot... to use them as a shield against being attacked. She's big on documentation, so... show the documentation of relatives dying in the Holocaust. It sounds mean, but - the Nazis kept really good records... ironically. In addition, because she is so adamant about getting documentation from others - perhaps she should abide by her own standards. So, in a word, I think mentioning religion is fair, I'm just not convinced she's Jewish - as she may have used it to gain citizenship in Israel and subsequently to the U.S. (she was put in an arranged marriage with a U.S. man). --Beersquirrel (talk) 04:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

All of this may be totally true, but we are here to merely distill the specific reliable sources about her into this article. That is, if the sources state that he has said she is Jewish, without all of the doubts that you suggest, then we need to present this information with the same inflection. It is particularly important to impartially stick to the sources in biographies of living people articles, regardless of how we might personally feel about the subject. If you find a reliable source that makes these particular claims with regards to Taitz, then please present them. thanks, --guyzero | talk 04:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Removed Sentence

Why does someone keep removing the statement that she doesn't want to be President, even though she said so herself in the same interview where she said she might run for an office? It's like someone's trying to slander her.Leo-Isaurus-Rex (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't find it terribly encyclopedic to report on Tait'z own idle speculations of what she may or may not do in regards to running for office. Maybe if a legitimate "Draft Orly!" movement were out there to document, showing that the possibility actually hsa outside support and sourcing, that'd be article worthy. But if it is just her own pontificating? No. Tarc (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

She can't be President, whether she wants to be or not, since, ironically, she is not a native born citizen. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Orlt Taitz Esq has again been hacked!

Going to her site yesterday, I saw it wanted to send me to malware.cn. Like the .cn domain responsible for the earlier malware, this domain is owned by AA Nevedomskiy, who in the past has been caught phishing for logins: [1]

Orley's site should certainly not be visited without resident anti-virus and anti-adware programs. In view of the fact that this is the second infection, should there not be a warning attached to the address in the info box? --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Orly keeps claiming that the malware claims are politically motivated and are not true. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

rexcatly. there is a problem with us using the anti-Orly Taitz arguments without attibution. There is NO evidence that there was a malware.cn link (and by evidence i dont meant your original research but an actual WP:RS that is WP:VERIFIABLE. wITHOUT THIS EVIDENCE, we cannot post something defematory about a nother person User:Smith Jones 23:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

It may be possible that there's something in the malware filters built into most browsers. Almost might be something in archive.org. Ravensfire (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it would have to be considered a primary source, but here's the link to Google's safe browsing diagnostic page for her site - [2] and from a similar site [3]. Several other tools also reports hits, mostly for what looks like injected javascript creating a hidden iframe. There's a fair number of hits on google, but I was only seeing links to blogs or non RS sites.

My suspicion is there's a vulnerability being exploited on the site's server stack, or your average XSS attack. Honestly, unless something major happens because of this, there's no reason to include it. It doesn't get done for other sites that have this happen, no reason to do it to this article. But it would ironic to include some of the conspiracy theories about what's happening, then find a lawyer demanding proof that her site is safe and secure! (I kid! I kid!) Ravensfire (talk) 01:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I can tell you for a fact that her site is hacked. It's a Wordpress exploit, she's running an older version. Someone needs to

help her. But she trusts no one. K8cpa (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

K8cpa (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Traffic alert - article linked from AboveTheLaw

A post on AboveTheLaw, a moderately high-traffic blog for lawyers, links to this article. Resulting vandalism would not be surprising... [4] MirrorLockup (talk) 14:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Romania, former swimsuit model,

This has a few more details. It seems she lived in Romania for some time before she went to the United States. Since she is portraying herself as fiercely anti-communist, the fact that for some reason she went to live under Nicolae Ceauşescu is notable. Whether that is also true for the "former swimsuit model" part remains to be seen.--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 13:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

How sure are we that she was called Averbukh or Averbukha in the Soviet Union? This name seems to be on her marriage license as well.--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 14:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)