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 sourcedmust 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 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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
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.
I was thinking the same. The creator had previously pushed for the whole scoop on the Facebook post controversy at the Marconi article, but I shortened it due to WP:UNDUE. This article was apparently created in response to that. Parsley Man (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This article's notability does hinge on the Shooting of Benjamin Marconi. This information should be merged into that article and the rest of the article removed.Cdman882 (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is already a James Oakley article. I have written a new article on a different James Oakley, who holds the elected position of County Judge in Burnet County, Texas. I put the article at James Oakley (judge). E.M.Gregory objected on the grounds that Oakley's position is not as a Judge in the normal meaning of the word, as a County Judge has primarily administrative responsibilities in the County, though some judicial responsibilities remain (which vary, county to county). E.M.G. moved the page to James Oakley (County administrator). I object to this disambiguator as a county administrator is an appointed official working under the direction of the elected representatives, and Oakley is elected as the chair of the body leading the County, called the Commissioners' Court. Oakley is not a County Administrator, he is the person to whom a county administrator would answer. My view is that the appropriate disambiguation would be James Oakley (County Judge) because "County Judge" is the name of the position he was elected to, and the title he uses, and even if there is potential for confusion, WP needs to defer to the verifiable title of his Office. I welcome and any all views and suggestions on alternatives. I know there is a merge request pending, I request consideration of the disambiguation issue separate from that. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 10:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We should probably move to James Oakley (politician). Note context: this article was created when Oakley, a hitherto non-bluelinked, country-level Texas politician, responded to the Shooting of Benjamin Marconi (white cop shot by black perp,) by asserting that perp should be lynched. EdChem nominated Oakley (correction: the Marconi article), for DYK Template:Did you know nominations/Shooting of Benjamin Marconi. I object to the hook, "... that a Texas County Judge apologised for implying on Facebook that the black suspect in the shooting death of white police officer Benjamin Marconi should be lynched?" I had been flagged to comment at DYK because I had stumbled into the article at AFD, sourced and expanded it (I do that sort of thing on an random variety of article at AFD; as long as I'm running a search to see if a topic is notable, I figure I might as well add the sources I find.) A County judge is not a "judge" in the usual sense of the word "judge." I therefore objected to the DYK hook and article title as misleading. And here we are.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: EdChem has not nominate Oakley for DYK, I have nominated the article on the shooting, and offered as ALT0 a hook that does not include Oakley in any way, and then quite explicitly stated that including Oakley (as I do, without naming him, in the ALTs) may be found unacceptable under DYKs rules on unduly negative hooks with BLPs, which is why ALT0 is included as a proposal. I have given alternatives which the DYK community might or might not conclude is acceptable, being open about the issue. I think I am behaving ethically and in a principled manner, so please don't imply I am being underhanded. On "(politician)" as a disambiguator, I could live with that if consensus were against "(County Judge)", but I remain of the view that "(County administrator)" is inaccurate and unacceptable under policy. EdChem (talk) 12:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if I appeared to describe your editing as underhanded. My point is that the hook is misleading, not that your editing is underhanded.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think (Judge) is best per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE. If he's known as a judge, than use that and forget the technicalities. MB 04:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"judge" does not "unambiguously define" Oakley's job asp per WP:PRECISE. Quite the opposite, it misleads.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I propose using (politician). It is accurate, precise, concise and normative. We use (politician) to disambigulate thousands of politicians here.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
survey of names The only other bluelinked county judge who needed a disambig was described as (rancher), not as a (judge).E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note This text in "Texas" section at County Judge: "The blurring of roles and titles can lead to misconceptions. For example, following the shooting death of Detective Benjamine Marconi[11][12] and the arrest of the suspect,[13][14] and charged with capital murder.[13][15] County Judge James Oakley made a controversial and allegedly racist remark on Facebook which alluded to lynching; the event attracted considerable attention and criticism, with most comments emphasising they were made by a judge,[16][17][18][19][20] despite Oakley being essentially a politician."E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oakley, who has held previous elected positions, is, "essentially a politician." The simple solution is to do the usual when disambigulating politicians, and call him a "politician."E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: can you suggest any RS which actually describes Oakley as a politician? I ask as I haven't found one, but there are oodles calling him County Judge. Now, WP can choose any disambiguator it likes, and I think "politician" is a true disambiguator, but any move to describe Oakley as a politician in text (including a DYK hook) is open to challenge under policy - including my use of the term in your above quote of my writing at County judge, which, absent such an RS, I'm reflecting I should change to "despite Oakley's role being essentially administrative rather than judicial." EdChem (talk) 12:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
coverage like this: [1] makes the political/politician - not judicial - nature of his career clear. As you wrote in the above, it was a problem that much of the coverage of his racist remark mischaracterized him as a judge. Let's not compound that problem at DYK.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been looking for references, I think this one might work, it offers a description of the County Judge role in Texas that would support "politician" as a descriptor. EdChem (talk) 13:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
wouldn'tjaknow; gBooks blocked my view of that page. In principle, I think politician works for the page and for the hook. Which is a strong hook. Shocking remark.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: PS: Any thoughts on my change of the redirect for County judge to an article? I know it needs further expansion for the use of the term by actual judicial officers. I'm thinking a DYK could be something like "... that in 2015, about 85% of Texas' 254 County Judges were not licensed to practice law?" EdChem (talk) 13:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Kentucky needs a section. But, in principle such an article is reasonable. I truly knew nothing about Texas county judges until I encountered it here, and really can't comment on the article in a scholarly way. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So does Arkansas. It was new to me, too, I saw his comment and was shocked a judge would say such a think, it is less surprising though just as wrong from a politician. The issue with DYK won't be the point that concerns you, though, it will be that unduly negative materials about living people are avoided, so the question of what is unduly negative comes up. Also, I have been adding more to Oakley's article about his career, are you notability concerns at all changed? Thanks. EdChem (talk) 13:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@EdChem: Are you also good with a rename to politician?E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: I agree that James Oakley (judge) was a wrong choice on my part, and should be a redirect. Based on precedent for disambiguating, James Oakley (politician) is reasonable, at least until another a politician James Oakley comes along... and I suspect this Oakley's ambitions run at least to State politics, at which point the "(politician)" disambiguation will be inevitable, unless he supplants the present James Oakley . In addition, I think that James Oakley (County Judge) should be created as a redirect, all the links to James Oakley (County administrator) repaired and that redirect deleted. How does that seem to you? EdChem (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, with all those articles circulating, "judge" could be a search term. So I'm good with creating a redirect. Just not with using "judge" in a DYK hook. I'll redirect the page now. Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "Judge" is certainly wrong. To most people that means a...well, judge! It's confusing. Personally, I think the current disambiguator is fine, although I'm not sure why it's capitalised. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation § James Oakley