Jump to content

Talk:Ted Cruz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Taric25 (talk | contribs) at 08:10, 19 June 2016 (→‎Zodiac Killer: Widespread). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

RfC: Criticisms and accolades

There is a clear consensus to remove the accolades section, and add any material from that section which should remain in the article into other sections. What specific material should be retained is an editorial decision, as is where it is placed in the rest of the article, and how the material is phrased. I have edited the main article to attempt to do this. Tazerdadog (talk) 03:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should this article have a section for just "Accolades", be comprehensive and have a section named "Accolades and criticisms", or leave such a section out entirely? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 16:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Accolades and criticisms"


"Accolades" only

 

Neither option

Discussion

The content never should have been moved. I saw when it was moved and wholly disagreed with said move at the time it occurred. I still disagree with it. That said, I was not going to be involved in an edit war and let it stand. When reverting the content back in today, I should have removed the duplication from the other section. That was my error. But, because this RfC and quest for consensus is already happening, it wouldn't be right to remove it at this time. I will, however, make a note of the duplicated content in my !vote above. Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 17:44, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sources for infobox religion?

I am going through the entire list of all forty candidates for US President in 2016 (many now withdrawn) and trying to make sure that the religion entry in the infobox of each page meets Wikipedia's requirements.

Here are the requirements for listing a religion in the infobox (religion in the body of the article has different rules):

  • Per Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 126#RfC: Religion in biographical infoboxes: "the 'religion=' parameter and the associated 'denomination=' parameter should be removed from all pages that use Template:Infobox person. Inclusion is permitted in individual articles' infoboxes as a custom parameter only if directly tied to the person's notability. Inclusion is permitted in derived, more specific infoboxes that genuinely need it for all cases, such as one for religious leaders." Please note that if nobody has bothered to mention religion in the body of the article, that is strong evidence that the subject's beliefs are not relevant to their public life or notability.
  • Per WP:BLPCAT: "Categories regarding religious beliefs (or lack of such) should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources" ... "These principles apply equally to lists, navigation templates, and Infobox statements". The "relevant to their public life or notability" clause should be interpreted as follows: Would this individual be notable for his/her religion if he/she were not notable for running for US president? Are we talking about someone who is notable for being religious, of someone who is notable who also happens to be religious?
  • Per WP:CAT/R: "Categories regarding religious beliefs or lack of such beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question (see WP:BLPCAT), either through direct speech or through actions like serving in an official clerical position for the religion." In other words, if someone running for US president has never publicly stated on the record that they belong to a religion, we don't take the word of even reliable sources on what their religion is.
  • Per WP:LOCALCON, a local consensus on an article talk page can not override the overwhelming (75% to 25%) consensus at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes that nonreligions cannot be listed in the religion entry of any infobox. That RfC has a handy list of religions and nonreligions to avoid the inevitable arguments about what is and what is not a religion. Everyone who !voted on the RfC saw that list and had ample opportunity to dispute it if they disagreed with it.

The forty candidates are:

Extended content

Source of list: United States presidential election, 2016

  • Name: Farley Anderson: No Wikipedia page, nothing to do.
  • Name: Jeb Bush: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism Religion name mentioned in Body? Yes, but all links cited are dead. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Ben Carson: Infobox Religion: Seventh-day Adventist. Clearly meets all requirements for inclusion, nothing to do.
  • Name: Darrell Castle: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Lincoln Chafee: Infobox Religion: Episcopalian. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Darryl Cherney: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Chris Christie: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as Catholic.[1] Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Hillary Clinton: Infobox Religion: Methodist. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as Methodist.[2] Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Ted Cruz: Infobox Religion: Southern Baptist. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as Southern Baptist.[3] Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Sedinam Curry: No Wikipedia page, nothing to do.
  • Name: Carly Fiorina: Infobox Religion: Nondenominational Christianity. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Jim Gilmore: Infobox Religion: Methodism. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Lindsey Graham: Infobox Religion: Southern Baptist. Religion name mentioned in body, but citation fails direct speech requiement.[4] Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: James Hedges: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Tom Hoefling: No Infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Mike Huckabee: Infobox Religion: Southern Baptist. Clearly meets all requirements for inclusion, nothing to do.
  • Name: Bobby Jindal: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as "Evangelical Catholic."[5]
  • Name: Gary Johnson: Infobox Religion: Lutheranism. Religion name mentioned in body, but citation is a dead link. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: John Kasich: Infobox Religion: Anglicanism. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as Christian[6] but citation doesn't have him specifying anglicism in direct speech. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Chris Keniston: No Wikipedia page, nothing to do.
  • Name: William Kreml: No Wikipedia page, nothing to do.
  • Name: Gloria La Riva: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Lawrence Lessig: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: John McAfee: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Kent Mesplay: Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Martin O'Malley: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name mentioned in body, comes really close to self-identifying[7] but I would be more comforable if we could find a citation with unambigious direct speech. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: George Pataki: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Rand Paul: Infobox Religion: Presbyterianism. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Rick Perry: Infobox Religion: Nondenominational Evangelicalism. Religion name mentioned in body, but this page is a classic case of what happens when you don't follow the self-identification rule. Someone took a reference that says "Perry now attends Lake Hills Church more frequently than he attends Tarrytown, he said, in part because it's closer to his home"[8] and assigned him as being a member of Lake Hills Church based on that slim evidence. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Austin Petersen: No Wikipedia page, nothing to do.
  • Name: Marco Rubio: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name mentioned in body, but this page is a classic case of what happens when you don't follow the self-identification rule. Someone took a reference that says "Rubio... attends Catholic churches as well as a Southern Baptist megachurch."[9] and assigned him as being Roman Catholic based on that slim evidence. Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Bernie Sanders: Infobox Religion: Infobox religion already decided by RfC. See Talk:Bernie Sanders/Archive 13.
  • Name: Rick Santorum: Infobox Religion: Roman Catholicism. Religion name mentioned in body. Many citations about him being catholic, but I couldn't find a place where he self-identifioes using direct speech. Religion name mentioned in body,
  • Name: Rod Silva (businessman) No Infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Mimi Soltysik Infobox Religion: No religion entry in infobox, nothing to do.
  • Name: Jill Stein Infobox Religion: Reform Judaism. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed.
  • Name: Donald Trump Infobox Religion:Presbyterian. Infobox religion already decided by RfC. See Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 1#Donald Trump Religion
  • Name: Scott Walker Infobox Religion: Nondenominational Evangelicalism. Religion name mentioned in body, self-identifies as "born-again Christian".[10] Discuss on article talk page.
  • Name: Jim Webb Infobox Religion: Nondenominational Christianity. Religion name not mentioned in body; religion entry in infobox should be removed. Note: Citation in infobox fails self-identification requirement.

My goal is to determine whether Wikipedia's requirements are met for the above forty pages, and to insure that we have citations to reliable sources that meet the requirements.

You are encouraged to look at and comment on the other pages, not just this one.

Please provide any citations that you believe establish a direct tie to the person's notability, self-identification in the person's own words, etc. Merely posting an opinion is not particularly helpful unless you have sources to back up your claims. I would ask everyone to please avoid responding to any comment that doesn't discuss a source or one of the requirements listed above. You can. of course, discuss anything you want in a separate section, but right now we are focusing on finding and verifying sources that meet Wikipedia's requirements. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the article for indication that this subject is notable because of his religion, and didn't see any. His religion is covered in the article, but the extra highlighting has been removed per WP:BLPCAT. Xenophrenic (talk) 19:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Guy Macon and Xenophrenic, Cruz is a devout Christian who has self-identified as Southern Baptist, which can even be seen in a quote in this article. His religious beliefs are often considered to have a considerable affect on his religious [political] views. I therefore propose re-adding the designation to the infobox. Display name 99 (talk) 23:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
His religious beliefs are often considered to have a considerable affect on his religious views.
That rather goes without saying, doesn't it? All that aside, the question isn't whether Cruz is religious, or even very religious. That's not what the field in the infobox is used for. That field would only be used if the article subject is famous for being a Southern Baptist. In other words, do reliable sources consistently refer to him as "Baptist Cruz" or do they refer to him as "Senator Cruz"? That should help clarify how he is identified in the infobox. Now if he decides to give up politics and become a minister at his church, we may have to revisit this issue. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 00:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Xenophrenic, the second version of the word "religious" was meant to be "political." Cruz cites his Christian faith frequently and it is noted to have a significant influence on his political views. I see no reason why his religious affiliation should not be included. Display name 99 (talk) 00:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All that aside, the question isn't whether Cruz is religious, or even very religious, or whether informs his political views. That's not what the field in the infobox is used for. That field would only be used if the article subject is famous for being a Southern Baptist. In other words, do reliable sources consistently refer to him as "Baptist Cruz" or do they refer to him as "Senator Cruz"? That should help clarify how he is identified in the infobox. Now if he decides to give up politics and become a minister at his church, and becomes notable for that, we may have to revisit this issue. Xenophrenic (talk) 00:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You may find WP:NONDEF helpful in determining whether Cruz's notability is because of his religion. Also, reliable sources would be needed which explain not just that he is religious, and what his beliefs are (I'm sure there are plenty of those sources), but more importantly, how he is famous for his religion. Xenophrenic (talk) 00:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Xenophrenic, religious affiliation is an important piece of basic information for people. That is why it has been included in infoboxes on Wikipedia for so many years. I think that the changes that have been made in the last couple of weeks are hasty and imprudent and altogether decrease the quality of the infobox. Its negative effects are particularly obvious in this case due to the role that religion plays in the life of this subject, which is well-documented. It's not really less important than information on how many children he has or when he was born. In other words, do reliable sources consistently refer to him as "Father Cruz of 2" or "Ted Cruz of 1970" or "Houstonian Cruz", or do they refer to him as "Senator Cruz"? The point is that the infobox is meant to provide a summary of basic information about the subject. Religion fits that category. Display name 99 (talk) 01:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No one said that religious affiliation isn't important basic information. Of course it should be in our articles. But we're talking specifically about religion in Category and Infobox fields, which is completely different. Please educate yourself on the very important difference between the |religion= field and the |birthdate= field, as explained at WP:CATGRS. (Note: there are 5 "sensitive" Cats/Fields which require special handling, and "Date of Birth" and "Children" are not part of those 5.) Then educate yourself on the top three reasons why the community decided in its not-at-all-hasty-decision to begin enforcing longstanding Wikipedia policy. After you have a good understanding of those two key parts (why the religion field/cat is sensitive, and what major reasons prompted this enforcement) of this discussion, please ping me and we can continue this discussion. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 01:33, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Xenophrenic, I have read over what you posted. I understand why religion is much more sensitive than a birth date. However, if religious affiliation has been verified by many reliable sources, as it is in the case of Ted Cruz, I don't see why it can't go in. In addition, the "Village pump" archive which you linked to proposed including religion "if directly tied to the person's notability, per consensus at the article". I would say that Cruz's Southern Baptist faith is very much tied to his notability. He is popular amongst devout Evangelical conservative Christians, even though he lost the "evangelical" vote in the 2016 presidential primaries. Cruz is known for his conservative positions which are very much influenced by his faith. The proposal allows for inclusion in the infobox to be decided on a case-by-case basis for each article, I think that in for this particular article it is noteworthy enough to be included. Display name 99 (talk) 02:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
if religious affiliation has been verified ... I don't see why it can't go in
Because verification of religious affiliation (by mandatory self-identification) is just one of several requirements to also activate the reserved |religion= field. It also has to be a defining characteristic of his public notability. I thought you read what I posted. Please re-read WP:NONDEF; then provide here for review one or more reliable sources explaining why he's famous for being a Baptist (and not, instead, famous for being a politician who happens to be very religious). Then we can activate the religion field, and also add his Southern Baptist religion to the lead sentence of this article, with the appropriate sourcing provided by you. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 02:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2016

Wyatt7009 (talk) 06:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Blank request — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:53, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zodiac Killer

Why does this article make zero mention about the pervasive association with Cruz and the Zodiac Killer across the internet? Taric25 (talk) 07:22, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia doesn't care about that kind of childishness and it wasn't pervasive anyway. 108.16.82.233 (talk) 10:06, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no, there are several sources that corroborate that this is indeed widespread. Taric25 (talk) 08:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ted_Cruz&oldid=725995576"