Talk:Meitiv incidents
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Pronunciation[edit]
Could somebody add an IPA transcription of how their name is pronounced?--Witan (talk) 16:44, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Passionate debate[edit]
To the prolific IP from Tempe, please respect the BRD process and don't edit war. Our neutrality policy dictates that we follow the sources, applying appropriate when when there's a conflict among them. In this case there's no conflict however. The cited CNN source says there was a passionate debate. Therefore, we say there was a passionate debate. We generally try to avoid removing content based on neutrality concerns. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 05:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- "Passionate debate" is a value judgement. How would you measure or demonstrate its passion? How would we quantify it? What is the threshold for passionate versus something else? Wikipedia is committed to a neutral tone. We use facts from the sources and we don't allow their editorializing to come through. If this were a useful opinion to have in the article, I would say WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. But in fact it is not useful. It merely serves to damage Wikipedia's neutral tone. Take it out. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 05:47, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- There is no requirement that content be quantifiable. "Passionate" is not an opinion. In fact, it's a fact.
News articles do not editorialize when they include adjectives like "passionate." The journalist applied her professional judgment to describe the debate, and the description passed the editor's review. We include information like this all the time across the encyclopedia. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- The Washginton Post describes the debate as "national" which I think is (a) factual and (b) descriptive. How about that? 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 06:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Sure. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:22, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- There is no requirement that content be quantifiable. "Passionate" is not an opinion. In fact, it's a fact.
Candidacy for Montgomery County Council[edit]
This paragraph was recently deleted (Personal attack removed). Meitiv is running as the "free-range mom" so her candidacy is directly related to these incidents. (Personal attack removed)
Danielle Meitiv, a climate scientist,[1] declared her candidacy for an at-large seat on the Montgomery County Council in July 2017.[2] She has since been endorsed by the Sierra Club,[3] the Maryland/D.C. AFL-CIO,[4] and National Nurses United, among others.[5]
--MopTop (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Montgomery council hopeful questions Leggett's all-male at-large endorsements". The Washington Post. April 19, 2018.
- ^ "Candidates Line Up To Run for At-Large County Council Seats in 2018". Bethesda Magazine. July 28, 2017.
- ^ "Endorsements". Sierra Club. January 29, 2018.
- ^ "2018 Endorsements: County Executive, County Council, School Board". Bethesda Magazine. May 29, 2018.
- ^ "Nurses Endorse Elrich for Montgomery County Executive, Brooks, Hucker, Meitiv, & Wilhelm for County Council". National Nurses United. April 17, 2018.
- If there's a verifiable connection between her campaign and the incidents that are the subject of the article, then I'd support the addition of some content. The endorsements aren't noteworthy. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2018 (UTC)