Talk:Kimberley Strassel

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 July 2020. The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

Biography

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

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Quotations discussion

Perhaps then you can explain here how the quotes: "My grandfather, August Strassel, served in World War II in Europe." "People have been dying in the interim."

tell the reader anything about her at ALL? who gives a toss if her grandfather was in WWII? Whose grandfather WASN'T in WWII?! and the quote "People have been dying in the interim" gives precisely ZERO context as to what she's even talking about at all. The reader has to read the entire interview on that page just to get to that tiny bit of text which has absolutely no relevance to anything there except a single previous question. These quotes contribute absolutely nothing to the article or the readers understanding of Strassel's views on anything and need to be removed. Put the links at the bottom if they're needed that bad.--Deglr6328 06:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Read between the lines, I disagree there is zero context. Deference should be given to the possibility of relevance. How did you happen upon this article? Hollow are the Ori 09:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Readers of an encyclopedia should not be expected to "read between the lines". The quotes make no sense and have no obvious relevance, I am keeping the links at the bottom of the page. Note that if you revert again you will be in violation of the 3 revert rule.[1] Added to rfc [2]. --Deglr6328 17:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All the quotations require an equal amount of "reading between the lines", why did you target the bottom 2, the last one was added much more recently...? I agree the last quotation seems the most out of context but it is relevant given the context of all the quotations in total. Separately, the 7th quotation is highly relevant because of what I interpret to be her omission... which side did her grandfather serve for in WWII...? When a dispute exists we should generally err on the side of inclusiveness rather than exclusion. Hollow are the Ori 18:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So the main reason you are providing for keeping that quote is you think her grandfather may have been a Nazi because she hasn't explicitly stated that he wasn't one? That is unbelieveably absurd. Furthermore why on earth would the reader remotely care? The quote "People have been dying in the interim" is a mere sentance fragment, it has no relevance or meaning untill the reader reads the ENTIRE interview on the linked page anyway. All the information in those quotes is right there for the reader at the bottom of the page in the linked interviews if they are that interested. Quotes on personal pages are used for four main reasons 1-to show a quote which has become famous for some reason, 2-to show the person's biases 3-to show how brilliant/insightful/whatever the person is/was 4-to show what a dumb/clueless bitch/bastard the person is/was. --Deglr6328 04:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other quotations, that you are apparently ok with, have the same level of ommittance and/or duplicity and/or obfuscuity if you read between the lines. I don't know if her grandfather was a Nazi but the way she phrased that sentence is noteworthy, especially given the possible alternative meanings of the other quotations and her word choices. Hollow are the Ori 05:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No way. All the other quotes are perfectly understandable. They make SENSE.--->

This is what's really happening in Klamath--call it rural cleansing--and it's repeating itself in environmental battles across the country. Indeed, the goal of many environmental groups--from the Sierra Club to the Oregon Natural Resources Council--is no longer to protect nature. It's to expunge humans from the countryside. [3]

Translation: I'm a wacky anti-environmentalist who isn't above using the most moronic rhetoric possible to make my enimies look foolish.

Hato's translation: her and her co-conspirators desire to expunge humans from the countryside as part of a massive genocide conspiracy. Environmentalism is just one half of a dichotomy they've fabricated and orchestrate.

You know we've had, especially in the AIDS field, Brazil for instance has threatened to override the patents of various companies that spent years and years and enormous amount of research money trying to come up with these, in the end, miraculous drugs. [4]

Translation: who cares if millions of poor people's lives hang in the balance, Pfizer needs its billions to make more boner pills!

Hato's translation: few if any doctors believe AIDS drugs are "miraculous", she means the word miraculous as in happy that AIDS and AIDS drugs have killed so many people. She is complicit in vast genocide.

If you're an environmentalist, you should love nuclear energy because it's pollution free. [5]

Translation: Glossing over importaint details regarding nuclear power roxxorz b/c it makes me look super snarky!

Hato's translation: saying nuclear energy is pollution free is ridiculous, her and her co-conspirators have been hoarding the cure for cancer so feel safe from radioactive waste. Depleted uranium and radioactive waste is a part of their genocide scheme.

Clear Skies, to me, is so exciting because it's about free market environmentalism. And yeah, 30 years ago we set up a lot of mandates that were about forcing people to do certain things that has led to a lot of lawsuits. [6]

Translation: anything that could potentially hamper money making buisness at the behest of environmental concern is stooopid! fuck the earth!

Hato's translation: free market environmentalism is a bullshit oxy-moron. Her and her co-conspirators set up a lot of mandates 30 years ago as part of using environmentalism to further their conspiratorial plans.

The EPA's truthful words went only so far to contain fear. [7]

this actually DOES need more context or probably needs to go but obviously is an anti epa stance.

Hato's translation: at least 2 problems: 1) she is characterizing the EPA's words as "truthful" which is ridiculously presumption inducing, and 2) she is acknowleding that the EPA's words have fear in them, they use fear to control the public.

Hillary aims to strangle America's game-fowl industry. [8]

self explanatory dumb hyperbole

Hato's translation: ridiculously manipulative and illogical anti-hillary hatchet job to the point of propaganda.

See? Almost all are otherwise super easy to understand and contextualize without further explanation. the last two aren't.--Deglr6328 05:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you intentionally not reading between the lines? Hollow are the Ori 10:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

omgz are you kidding? what ARE you talking about? --Deglr6328 22:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please hold off on adding quotation wikilinks

I am going to seek comments in the Wikipedia namespace on the appropriateness of wikilinking portions of quotations. In the mean time could you please hold off on wikilinking inside quotations in this article? I see the Wikipedia:Build the web policy but no where does it state that quotations must contain wikilinks, and it can't possibly require that this article must contain exactly the wikilinks you want. Hollow are the Ori 22:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you hold off from removing them while you seek comments? Gamaliel 22:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deference should be given to those pointing out the possibility of taint. Hollow are the Ori 22:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a WP:OFFICE action we're talking about here, it's some wikilinks. Since you (and only you) are the one who wants to change the standard way of doing things, it's you who should be deferring to traditional WP style until there's a consensus for your preferred style. Gamaliel 22:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deciding what is and what is not wikilinked is highly disputed all over wikipedia so I don't know where you are coming from. The Wikipedia:Build the web policy you or someone referenced does not specifically mention quotations and certainly is not justification that quotations must contain wikilinks. Hollow are the Ori 22:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that anything must be linked, but certainly if you want to remove useful links against consensus and the established way of doing things you need more than your personal style preference. Gamaliel 22:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would not characterize ensuring the untaintedness of quotations as a "personal style preference". Hollow are the Ori 23:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant to HatO's revert war is WP:POINT. -- FRCP11 05:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please attempt to refute my argument rather than robotically referencing wikipedia policy that you only claim supports your position. Hollow are the Ori 06:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:MOS and WP:MOS-L. -- FRCP11 22:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could everyone involved please remember the three-revert rule. That includes the line "people can be blocked for edit warring or disruption even if they do not revert more than three times per day" - i.e. make sure you come to a consensus here on the talk page rather than continually reverting the article. Petros471 17:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Quotations should not contain wikilinks proposal

A proposal relating to a dispute over this article has been created at Wikipedia:Quotations should not contain wikilinks, please discuss on that proposal's discussion page. Hollow are the Ori 23:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turn quotes into NPOV statements

The quote section could be dovetailed into a one or two paragraph statement explaining Strassel's views. This could be done in an NPOV way and would allow for plenty of wikilinking.

Mytwocents 18:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italics not needed

I am on a self-imposed monthlong holiday from editing WP articles, but I would like to point out that quotations are not italicized in the English-language WP and would request another editor to put them all into Roman. GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's ignore how many fact checkers have rated her statements false, she a RW liar, so she must be protected. That's why Wikipedia is viewed as a joke in academic circles and has to beg people for money. The RW DBags who mod this place makes sure the bias runs deep. At least this one doesn't quote her as evidence, like half the articles at this dumpster fire do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C5E:537F:DB8E:8C82:9A46:BF16:6CA9 (talk) 07:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This information is inaccurate and needs to be removed

Shortly before the November 2020 election, Strassel push unverified claims about Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.[10] Strassel's claims, published in an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, were contradicted by the Wall Street Journal's own reporting arm.[11] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genericuser1234 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did a copyedit on the text. It fully reflects what the source says. Lard Almighty (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The text is accurate. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The editor "Yodabyte" just added egregious weasel wording that makes it unclear to readers that Strassel was pushing unverified conspiracy theories about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden. The editor made it seem as if she was reporting on claims made by others when she in fact was the one pushing the conspiracy drivel. The text also makes it unclear to readers that she is not a reporter. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 17:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is blatantly untrue, please go back and examine the tweaks I made. I was trying to add neutrality and correct weasel wording that unfortunately still remains in the article. Yodabyte (talk) 18:11, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed "pushed" to "promoted". It's less POV. Lard Almighty (talk) 06:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]