Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:11, 17 April 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aaron Maté article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 May 2021. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS The article Aaron Maté, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are: Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period) Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. Remedy instructions and exemptions Enforcement procedures: Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard. Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned. With respect to any reverting restrictions: Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion. Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism. Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Article appears extremely biased

Over and over again on Misplaced Pages, articles which have been "padlocked" for "vandalism", are incredibly biased and one-sided. The padlock is the vandalism. Somehow a tiny number of power-users control these articles to write them as they like, instead of adhering to what wikipedia is meant to be about. You see their names appear again and again in padlocked articles talk pages. This article needs to be written in a much more neutral tone, and these power-users need to stop taking control of articles. I have no idea of the mechanic by which they do so but it is being scandalously abused.61.8.106.71 (talk) 11:39, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

You are of course correct. Sadly Misplaced Pages seems FUBAR at this point. They want this article to be a character assassination and there's not much we can do about it. Iskube (talk) 16:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Aaron Mate openly denies the Uyghur genocide, denies the Bucha massacre, and has taken money from the pro Assad Lobby and the Russian government stating this is not character assassination. He is objectively a conspiracy theorist. Monochromemelo1 (talk) 01:46, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I urge you to look at Aarons page history before the lock and how much pro-Assad disinformation was on this page. The page is much better now and more neutral based on established facts 86.5.202.27 (talk) 14:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with OP's objections to the extremely biased language in this article, and the concerns raised about what seems like an obvious and direct attempt to assassinate and smear Maté's character. The repeated use of the same source for many negative and serious accusations in the introduction should be enough to warrant a complete re-write of this shameful article. And especially so when this same source is a single article from The Jewish Chronicle; a paper widely known for aggressive attacks and smears on political opponents. Peirik1 (talk) 11:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Peirik1:, the content you removed had several other sources attached - not just the Jewish Chronicle (which is still used in the article even after your edit) but sources from Politico, The Guardian and the South China Morning Post - two of which are on the WP:RSP list as perennially reliable sources. The Jewish Chronicle is also on this list, so your claims about content being "poorly sourced" are not quite in line with what Misplaced Pages considers poorly sourced. It's well documented and sourced that his publication publishes supportive coverages of the governments mentioned in the lede, and it appropriately summarises what he's notable for, so I'd like to hear why you think this is due for removal. I'd also like you not to make unfounded allegations of editors lying, per WP:AGF. Thanks. ser! 12:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

"acted as a briefer"

This edit ("acted as a briefer on behalf of the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations", with a footnote to a primary source). Due? Due in lead? What is a "briefer"? BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

I removed the unsourced part of the sentence. Is it a primary source? Cambial — foliar❧ 17:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

The sources provided do not explain the role of a "briefer" or how briefers are chosen. It would be worth mentioning Aaron's speech somewhere in the body of his bio, along with the topic that Aaron was briefing the UN meeting on ("his independent assessments of the latest report of the so-called Investigation and Identification Team of the OPCW regarding the same Douma incident"). However, it may not be notable enough to include in the lead, and less so in the first paragraph. Burrobert (talk) 05:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

"briefer" is an English word. Its meaning is clearly understood, and any reader who is not familiar with the word can consult a dictionary. It's no different in that respect than any of the other words we use on this page. The problem with this page, in general, is that there are few RS that seem to care about Mate. Hence the difficulty of determining NPOV. The whole page is weakly sourced. SPECIFICO talk 13:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

As there seems to be dispute over the content/sources here (including who he represented), just posting these potential sources.

• 2020: Team, Bellingcat Investigation (26 October 2020). "Unpublished OPCW Douma Correspondence Casts Further Doubt on Claims of 'Doctored' Report". bellingcat. Retrieved 9 July 2023. - reliable secondary source. Quote: "As well as pen articles on the supposed OPCW scandal, Mate went one step further and last month testified at the United Nations at the invitation of the Russian government where he accused the OPCW of falsifying its report on Douma."
• 2020/21: Security Council Arria Formula meetings - primary source. Quote: "28 September 2020 Subject: Implementation of UNSCR 2118: Upholding the Authority of the OPCW Invitees: Ian Henderson, former OPCW employee; Aaron Mate, independent journalist; Theodore Postol, professor emeritus of Science, Technology and International Security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Organisers: China, Russia" and "16 April 2021 Subject: Protection of Developing Nations Against Political Pressure: Upholding the Integrity of International Nonproliferation Regimes Invitees: Hans von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary-General and UN Humanitarian Coordinator (Iraq); U.S. Army Colonel (ret) Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell; and Aaron Mate, producer and presenter for The Grayzone, and contributor to The Nation magazine Organizers: Russia, China"
• 2023: "We must continue strengthening implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention: Statement delivered by Thomas Phipps at UN Security Council Arria Meeting on the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons". GOV.UK. 24 March 2023. Retrieved 9 July 2023. - primary source. Speech of UK representative at an Arria Formula meeting 2023, responding to Mate's speech. Quote: "No one is fooled by today’s charade. Your choice of briefers, your denial of the Syrian regime’s repeated chemical weapons use, your attacks on the OPCW’s work, your recent refusal to engage in Council meetings on Syria chemical weapons, all lay bare your cynicism in organising an event that purports to address “the OPCWs diminishing authority”... Mr. Aaron Maté made various claims today in this meeting."

BobFromBrockley (talk) 21:15, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

The quotes from these sources indicate that we can say that Aaron was invited by Russia. We should not say he represented Russia. We should also mention that he provided his assessment of the OPCW's IIT report into the Douma chemical attack. Burrobert (talk) 06:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Statement and references questionable

This sentence in the "Journalism" section, and these references, do not seem to gel together, or are even credible references for a statement about "government conclusions" :

"After numerous investigations into the 2016 election interference, U.S. intelligence agencies reported with "high confidence" that Russia was the culprit in the DNC cyberattacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.38.189.222 (talk) 13:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Subjective/partisan content in the introduction

This part, being partisan in a contested/polarized topic, has no place in the introduction. It should be removed from the introduction and displaced elsewhere in the article. The part : "With regard to Maté's reporting on the Syrian Civil War, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue said that, among the 28 social media accounts, individuals, outlets, and organisations which it studied, Maté was the most prolific spreader of disinformation surrounding the war, including on the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.165.200.191 (talk • contribs) 21:55, December 7, 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. This is referred to by exactly one secondary source; it's not appropriate weight or balance to include it in the lead. Cambial — foliar❧ 11:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I disagree quite strongly with this. We call him a journalist in the lead, therefore if he is documented to have echoed the propaganda of foreign governments, it should be mentioned in the lead. To not do so would be white-washing and would have a pro-fringe effect. This passage was also repeatedly discussed before and remained here through consensus; we would need stronger consensus to remove. DFlhb (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

This re-revert rationale is false. I do not need consensus to revert your bold change, because, as I said immediately above, there was previous consensus to include. You need consensus to make the change you just did, and you should either self-revert or someone else should. DFlhb (talk) 09:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Where on talk do you believe this consensus was/is established? A quick look at the archive shows no RfC or discussion establishing consensus about this. Multiple secondary sources have referred to him as a journalist. Exactly one secondary source refers to this document. Cambial — foliar❧ 09:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

That article was previously discussed in archive 1. It was then discussed here, in passing here, and in much more depth here, which you should remember since you were the one challenging it back then through pure original research, and failed to get consensus to remove it. Then it was brought up again in passing here, and in greater depth here, and survived those discussions too. Despite this, you've tried to boldly remove it by breaking 1RR, here and here, but had to self-revert due to lack of consensus. DFlhb (talk) 10:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Can the source for this claim even be considered as a citable source? The Institute for Strategic Dialogue is a pretty shady outfit, i.e. it hardly meets the criterion of being a "reliable source" that one can quote in good conscience. It looks very much like it's just a propaganda tool propped up and financed by the war-machine to, among other thing, defame critical voices. Such organizations should not be touched with a ten-foot-pole as sources for claims in serious science.2001:9E8:263D:D600:CCFF:6F88:1835:9E6A (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

What exactly makes it "shady"? The claim is attributed to them, one can make their own mind up. BeŻet (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Izzy Award - due in lead?

The Izzy Award seems to be quite an insignificant award given by some school in New York. Is it WP:DUE to be included in the lead? BeŻet (talk) 16:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. What about other parts of the lead, such as the statement in the first paragraph, that he "has appeared several times on Fox News on Tucker Carlson Tonight"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burrobert (talk • contribs) 22:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I think delete appearances. Without some more specific statement to make it encyclopedically relevant, it sounds like mere puffery.

I don't have an issue with the award. It is a brief mention and is apparently encyclopedically significant enough to have its own page. JArthur1984 (talk) 14:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

It actually does not have its own page. Which is the main point. BeŻet (talk) 08:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I think Carlson and Fox News is a much bigger deal in the real world than this obscure award! The sources we currently cite for the award are three sites associated with the school, plus Democracy Now claiming him as their ex-employee. That's not strong evidence of noteworthiness. Do other secondary sources mention it?

The only source currently cited for Carlson/Fox is The Intelligencer. If other secondary sources don't mention it, Id be inclined to remove that from lead too. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Good point on the award and its weak sourcing. I could go either way on that issue. JArthur1984 (talk) 14:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree the sourcing was bad, lacking a serious secondary source, which I've resolved. I also do not have strong views either way about it being leadworthy. Cambial — foliar❧ 16:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages articles under general sanctions
• Start-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles