| Revision as of 04:24, 25 August 2010 editGoethean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users40,563 edits →"Controversial", and "false" claims← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 19:38, 16 November 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,324,148 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 8 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. (Fix Category:Pages with redundant living parameter)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{skiptotoctalk}} |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Talkheader}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{WPBiography|living=yes}} |
|
{{Round in circles|search=yes}} |
|
|
{{DYK talk|31 August|2010|entry=... that American blogger ''']''' has strongly defended former ]n dictator ] and ] of Serbian ]?}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Politics}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=b|collapsed=n|blp=yes|listas=Geller, Pamela|1= |
|
{{pbneutral}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|politician-work-group=Yes|politician-priority=Low|a&e-work-group=yes|a&e-priority=}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative views|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject New York (state)|LI=yes}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Women writers|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Jewish Women}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|
|counter = 9 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Pamela Geller/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Archives |auto=yes |search=yes |title=] (]) |bot=lowercase sigmabot III |age=30 }} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
|
|target=Talk:Pamela Geller/Archive index |
|
|
|mask=Talk:Pamela Geller/Archive <#> |
|
|
|leading_zeros=0 |
|
|
|indexhere=yes |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Previous version == |
|
== "$100,000 (5555h 34m)" == |
|
I was googling and found of this article. You might be able to use some of it. ] (]) 17:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure what this means... ] (]) 23:04, 14 February 2020 (UTC) |
|
=="Controversial", and "false" claims == |
|
|
|
:I am not sure either so I have gone ahead and removed the "(5555h 34m)", if anyone disagrees they are welcome to revert me. ]<sup> ]</sup> 07:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
] has twice reverted my edit of the following material (my additions are in bold): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Does this article need twelve citations following a sentence? == |
|
Eric Boehlert, a senior fellow at '']'', concurred with Hooper's sentiments, remarking that "she's been instrumental, she has whipped up hatred in the right-wing blogosphere and now that's spilled out into the wider community."<ref name = "QueenHP" /> '''Media Matters has suggested that "Geller's history of outrageous, inflammatory and false claims, particularly when it comes to issues related to Islam, demonstrate that she cannot be expected to make accurate statements and should not be rewarded with a platform on national television." ''' (for talk page purposes I am removing the provided reference to preserve formatting) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean is having the first sentence in this section be followed by like twelve reference tags really conducive to the article, and is it conducive to readability? The answer to both these questions is no.--] (]) 19:40, 6 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
and |
|
|
|
:Sorry, but you're wrong. When I added Geller's quote about Islam being the "most genocidal ideology in the world," I had multiple shills question the quote until I used as many factual resources to support my edit. First, people are attacking the one or two sources which provide evidence. Now, people are complaining about too many sources used to provide evidence? It looks to me like people are just looking for anything to complain about. ] (]) 16:45, 4 February 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2024 == |
|
'''Controversial postings''' on "Atlas Shrugs" have included '''a number of false''' claims, '''including''' that Supreme Court Justice ] (who is ]) supports ] ideology (accompanied by a fake picture of her in a Nazi uniform) (for talk page purposes I am removing the provided reference to preserve formatting), video suggesting ] have ], a doctored photo showing ] urinating on an ] (for talk page purposes I am removing the provided reference to preserve formatting), and '''false''' claims that Obama's mother was involved in pornography and that Obama dated a "crack whore".(for talk page purposes I am removing the provided reference to preserve formatting) Geller has also used her site to accuse President Obama of ] and doing the bidding of "Islamic overlords," while posting an essay suggesting, '''without any evidence''', that the President is the "]" of ].(for talk page purposes I am removing the provided reference to preserve formatting) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Pamela Geller|answered=yes}} |
|
On my talk page and the edit summaries, ] has made various accusations that this edit is ], that it is my "personal analysis", a "novel synthesis" of previously published material, and that it is "uncited". I take exception to his claims. To point out that Ms. Geller is "controversial" seems, well, not very controversial. That her claims cited in the article are "false" is also a demonstrably true statement, and provides necessary context for the naive reader. Finally, the material on the Media Matters statement is indeed well-cited. |
|
|
|
Change “The Morning Toast” to “The Toast, formerly “The Morning Toast”, taken in and produced by Dear Media network since 2023.” ] (]) 05:31, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done:''' please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] <sup>] ]</sup> 05:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2024 == |
|
I have no wish to get into an edit war, however Truthsort seems intent on keeping out relevant, well-cited, and acceptable material. I hope s/he will refrain from further disruptive editing. ] (]) 05:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}} |
|
:Arjuna has added unsourced content calling her postings as "false", and being "without any evidence". The sources that are used in this section are the Huffington Post and from her website. The Huffington Post makes no mention of these postings being "false". This is clearly a violation of ] in that this type of content needs to have a reliable source. I removed the MMfA content he added because it is ]. There is already criticism from MMfA in the article and more content from here will just give a disproportionate amount of weight. ] (]) 05:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Leave out the far right anti-Muslim nonsense. Everyone to the right of your extreme left is referenced as “far right “ on this biased forum. Also Pam is anti Islamist terrorist not anti Islam. — ] (]) 09:55, 31 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:] '''Not done:''' please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 12:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::I have already addressed much of this above (it would have been more useful if you had added this into the section I created, but since you are relatively new here and may not have understood the need for convenience, I will do it for you). The false nature of these claims is self-evident, and thus needs no citation in the article (I mean seriously: Kagan, a Jew, supports Nazi ideology?). Does a sentence characterizing the claim that "the sun rises in the west" as "false" need to be cited? Can you possibly be serious in suggesting this? That would be very post-modern, indeed. ] (]) 06:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::The essay ] explains this perfectly |
|
|
|
|
|
::::<blockquote>Truth is not the criteria for inclusion of any idea or statement in a Misplaced Pages article, even if it is on a scientific topic (see Misplaced Pages:Science). The threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Misplaced Pages has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true.</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
:::] (]) 00:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your comments. First, I note that the material is still there today, so other editors in the last 24 hours don't seem to find "false", etc. to be objectionable. I believe that most, but not all, of the actual statements attributed to Geller are cited. I agree that those that aren't should be (I didn't contribute that material). The next issue is how to verify the claim that those Geller statements are indeed "false", which is a trickier proposition. Say, for example, that I am a bomb-throwing demagogue who makes the unsubstantiated claim on my blog that Beloved and Notable Public Person X is actually a heroin dealer, wife-beater, and pimp. Because that person is a public figure, libel laws do not apply. The claim is so absurd that no respectable news outlets will even dignify such a statement enough to bother refuting it. (Also, scientifically speaking it is impossible to prove a negative.) The only media sources that do note its falsity are other blogs, which are not appropriate sources of citations on Misplaced Pages. But to (effectively) re-publish that material without the context that they are self-evidently absurd is a disservice to the Misplaced Pages enterprise and the reader. What to do? At some level, common sense and decency should apply - i.e. such statements are self-evidently untrue and should be characterized as such. But to be honest, I have not had time to go through ] yet to see what if any specific policies may apply here, but this should prove instructive. If those guidelines don't clarify how to approach this, I think we should take this to the Admins at BLP, not because I'm trying to pick a fight with you, but because I genuinely think it's a gray area that needs to be clarified. So if we do need to do that, as far as I'm concerned it's an amicable process and hopefully you will see it the same way. Agree? ] (]) 03:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Indeed. Are we allowed to point out — in the absence of reliable sources — that the photo of Obama urinating on an American flag is doctored? Should we point out that the picture of Elena Kagan in a Nazi uniform is fake? That is the somewhat absurd implication of User:Truthsort's reading of policy. — ] ] 04:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Michael Oshrey == |
|
|
|
|
|
The former marriage does belong in Personal life. As she was listed as an owner, the investigation also is relevant. She appears to have been married although we need a source for that. I'm sure divorces are recorded online somewhere. ] (]) 13:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Agree in principle but this keep in mind that ] policies apply and so this material needs to be approached with extra caution to avoid unfair guilt by association. All this material must be extremely well-cited using ] Cheers, ] (]) 04:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC) |
|
Leave out the far right anti-Muslim nonsense. Everyone to the right of your extreme left is referenced as “far right “ on this biased forum. Also Pam is anti Islamist terrorist not anti Islam. — 65.128.86.246 (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Rusty4321 05:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)