Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:45, 28 August 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Candace Owens 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, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Politics and Government 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 This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Connecticut Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Conservatism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Journalism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States Low‑importance 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 Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women in Red This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. African diaspora Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Internet culture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. 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 blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: May 31 to June 6, 2020 June 7 to 13, 2020

Section sizes Section size for Candace Owens (38 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 10,121 10,121 Early life and education 7,207 7,207 Early career 19 6,634 Degree180 and anti-conservative blog 3,743 3,743 Privacy violation, Gamergate, and political transformation 2,872 2,872 Conservative activism 11,066 21,802 BLEXIT Foundation 5,843 5,843 Product promotion 4,893 4,893 Political views 7,722 88,113 Anti-black racism and Black Lives Matter 15,196 15,196 Women's rights 4,373 4,373 LGBT rights 7,733 7,733 Donald Trump 4,072 4,072 Immigration 2,343 2,343 Science 862 862 Climate change 2,772 2,772 Welfare 460 460 Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany 9,368 9,368 COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination 15,401 15,401 Russia and Ukraine 4,768 4,768 Jews and Judaism 9,291 9,291 Israel and Palestine 3,752 3,752 Legal issues 20 7,652 Kimberly Klacik lawsuit 4,870 4,870 Other 2,762 2,762 Controversies 20 26,602 Dispute with family of Mollie Tibbetts 2,986 2,986 Support of Kanye West 7,346 7,346 Promotion of conspiracy theories 4,403 4,403 Mention in Christchurch shooter's manifesto 5,440 5,440 Planned 2024 Australasian tour 6,407 6,407 Personal life 4,655 4,655 Bibliography 687 687 Filmography 1,283 1,283 Notes 24 24 References 28 28 Further reading 290 290 External links 2,756 2,756 Total 177,854 177,854

LGBT

So we completely ignore that she's best friends with an openly gay man Dave Rubin and she has stated she has 4 gay cousins. We just want to paint her as anti LGBT? Doesn't she support same sex marriage anymore and why was it removed from this section. Very bias and I'm speaking as someone who isn't particularly fond of her but facts are facts. Nlivataye (talk) 06:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

So I just reviewed the whole article and I didn't see any sentence that flat out calls her anti-LGBT. She has a sub-section named "LGBT" rights under the section "Political views", which after taking a closer look at, has several issues with its sourcing. I will make another talk page post under this one addressing the issues. Eruditess (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

LGBT Rights sub-section sourcing is problematic.

So after responding to @Nlivataye's talk page post above. I reviewed the article for any potential WP:UNDUE material. After taking a look at the sub-section " LGBT Rights" (Under section "Political Views"), the sub-section contains a few WP:MREL and WP:GUNREL sourcing citations. We have Mic.com which isn't on the WP:RSP, but it was singularly sourced in the first sentence about banning transitioning individuals from joining the military. The next sentence about Disney is sourced by Forbes Contributor which is classified as generally unreliable on RSP, as well as a marginally reliable HuffPo Political piece. (Which if we remove the gunrel Forbes piece will be a single sourced mrel piece). We also have a sentence singularly cited with a gunrel YouTube url. I have no issue with leaving the WP:GREL cited material. But the other content only cited by gunrel and mrel need to be removed. Eruditess (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Totally agree. Inconsistent sourcing makes all sourcing seem unreliable Superpig05 (talk) 16:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed those cites by adding others. Owens' own Twitter comment about Disney is still there for everyone to see. I'm not too bothered about the military issue, that could probably be removed as it's not that important - Owens has attacked far more LGBT targets. Black Kite (talk) 17:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

The Honorable

Reading from The Honourable article we find "In the United Kingdom, all sons and daughters of viscounts and barons (including the holders of life peerages) and the younger sons of earls are styled with this prefix." As the child of a Lord, this means George Farmer is styled this way. And given a wife shares the title of her husband this means Candace Owens is in fact The Honorable Candace Owens. So do stop deleting this correct form of address. Llevenius (talk) 19:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Does this comply with MOS ? Also, is there a reference for this that describes her title? If not it should probably be left off. Springee (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Owens is styled The Honarable here, here, and here. She can also be found using the style herself here. Llevenius (talk) 21:38, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

In those sources the title appears to apply when used to the couple rather than as an individual. I think it's an interesting fact and could be included in the part about her marriage. I'm not sure it should be applied as you are trying but I will let others weigh in. Springee (talk) 23:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

This matter should not really be an issue of any sort. She (Candace) is the wife of the son of a baron in the UK. She is automatically styled with the honorific Honorable. Her marriage to George Farmer (which is very well reported to have actually indeed occurred on 31 August 2019) is the proof that she is entitled to this honorific. The fact that she is entitled to this honorific is not (or should not be) debatable. The only real question is where in a biographical article should her designated honorific be used. It is this latter question that is a matter for the WP:MOS. Regardless of anything else, WP person info-boxes have provision for specifying the honorific of its subject. At the very least, one would expect that her honorific be specified within the info-box. If someone thinks that the honorific should not be specified inside the info-box, then that discussion should be taken up by the experts of that particular info-box (the person info-box in the present case) and otherwise would be a separate question than anything to do with Candace. If the info-box developers (experts) made provision for an honorific (which they have done up until the present time), then that should be honored and used until the info-box itself removes that provision. If someone feels that provision for an honorific within the person info-box should be removed, you should take your case to the talk page of the info-box in question; namely, Template talk:Infobox person --L.Smithfield (talk) 01:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

The Honorable, as used in the context of Brittish nobility, can be found in the infoboxes of, to name a few examples; John Byron, Robert Boyle, Anthony Berry, Nigella Lawson, and Gwyneth Dunwoody. So I find no reason why the same would not apply to Owens. Maybe it would be appropriate to add a sentence in Personal life to clarify that she is entitled to the style following her marriage. Llevenius (talk) 08:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

"The Honourable" is used for a large amount of reasons, not just nobility (many of those you've mentioned above are not nobility). However it would only apply to Owens in the sense that she is the wife of a son of a baron, and therefore she would be styled The Hon. Mrs. George Farmer not The Hon. Candace Owens (or Candace Farmer). Black Kite (talk) 10:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

That was what I was thinking/wondering about. I don't see an issue mentioning that in the article as the provided Yahoo news source does support that, as a couple, they have that title. It doesn't in my reading support that the title would independently apply to her. Springee (talk) 12:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I took the section out but would have no objection to it being put back with a more accurate reading of what her title actually is. Obviously, as a couple, The Hon. George and Candace Farmer is correct as well. I think the Yahoo source just puts it clumsily. Black Kite (talk) 12:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I have never in my life before heard of a couple title. Owens is to be styled The Honorable, irregardless of what follows be it Candace Owens or Mrs Geroge Farmer. Llevenius (talk) 14:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't say it was a couple title, I was pointing out how the "Honourable" should be written when it refers to the couple (i.e. not The Hon. George and Hon. Candace Farmer). And Owens is always The Hon. Mrs. George Farmer if you're going to use the honorific, not her own name (as her honorific only stems from her marriage). Black Kite (talk) 14:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I know I'm correct, but I'll stop arguing because I can't be bothered anymore. Llevenius (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I think it is an interesting fact, I wouldnt mind a small section mentioning it as more trivia. However, if we can't verify that this is correct with WP:RS I think it lacks notability and would unfortunately fall under WP:OR. MaximusEditor (talk) 20:00, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Education in infobox

This parameter shouldn't be used for non-graduates, per https://en.wikipedia.org/Template:Infobox_person/doc "It is usually not relevant to include either parameter for non-graduates, but article talk page consensus may conclude otherwise"

Unless there has been a consensus somewhere that i haven't seen --FMSky (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

In this case I would say that it's very relevant to her career as a journalist, especially since it's discussed further along in the article. I'd like to hear what others have to say. –dlthewave ☎ 18:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I would leave it out. My general feeling is this is a line for information about secondary degrees. As an example, is notable for not having graduated high school yet was a big proponent of education later in life. His bio box doesn't have an education line. Springee (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Leave it out it's not important. Iamreallygoodatcheckers 23:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Impertinent. Actually the article as a whole has potential but is a conglomerate of negativity. I'd wager several other articles in the political sphere written and slanted like this would have been rewritten many a moon ago--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Basically every article of BLPs who lean towards the right of the political spectrum is like this. Its a major problem on the eng wiki --FMSky (talk) 00:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• B-Class biography articles
• B-Class biography (politics and government) articles
• Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
• Politics and government work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• B-Class Connecticut articles
• Low-importance Connecticut articles
• WikiProject Connecticut articles
• B-Class Conservatism articles
• Low-importance Conservatism articles
• WikiProject Conservatism articles
• B-Class Journalism articles
• Low-importance Journalism articles
• WikiProject Journalism articles
• B-Class politics articles
• Low-importance politics articles
• B-Class American politics articles
• Low-importance American politics articles
• American politics task force articles
• WikiProject Politics articles
• B-Class United States articles
• Low-importance United States articles
• B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
• WikiProject United States articles
• B-Class Women writers articles
• Low-importance Women writers articles
• WikiProject Women articles
• WikiProject Women writers articles
• WikiProject Women in Red articles not associated with a meetup
• All WikiProject Women in Red pages
• B-Class African diaspora articles
• Mid-importance African diaspora articles
• WikiProject African diaspora articles
• B-Class Internet culture articles
• Low-importance Internet culture articles
• WikiProject Internet culture articles
• Pages in the Misplaced Pages Top 25 Report