This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ILovetoEditWikis (talk | contribs) at 17:52, 10 May 2018 (→Controversy Sections Deleted). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:52, 10 May 2018 by ILovetoEditWikis (talk | contribs) (→Controversy Sections Deleted)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| 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. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
California Assembly Bill 962 (2009)
Why do you keep removing the Notable Legislation section. You authored AB962, the court found it to be "unconstitutionaly vague". Thats fact. Own it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.110.191 (talk) 16:31, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm wondering the same thing. It is http://en.wikipedia.org/California_Assembly_Bill_962_%282009%29 But the main author's page does not incude any mention of this bill? Why is this? I hope politics is not getting in the way of knowledge.
quality reporters being removed
hello - this detail is being removed without good reason imo - in is the story of quality writers, such as http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-kevin-de-leon-20140619-story.html#page=1- https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n&diff=616061573&oldid=616033356 - http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/01/05/3424401/kevin-de-leon-aims-to-move-past.html#storylink=cpy - http://votesmart.org/candidate/biography/59926/kevin-de-leon#.U7sG4xZeclI - http://www.sacbee.com/2014/01/05/6046614/kevin-de-leon-aims-to-move-past.html - what is wrong with these sources - why is this - please explain Mosfetfaser (talk) 09:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- As I've already explained, I reverted them as WP:UNDUE and promotionally worded. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- C.Fred you were a part of this. Care to join? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
- The extent of my involvement before was fixing a capitalization error. That said, I looked at today's edits, and based on what's in the article, I changed the characterization of one story. De Leon only denied involvement in one of the sources; nowhere did it say he was cleared. —C.Fred (talk) 18:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
story add on
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n&diff=prev&oldid=617928216
On June 19, Senator de León was elected by his colleagues President Pro-Tempore of the California State Senate, effective October 15, 2014.
is this ok?
Mosfetfaser (talk) 17:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- written story - https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kevin_de_Le%C3%B3n&diff=618020931&oldid=617929945 Mosfetfaser (talk) 19:10, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Ghost gun incident
The passages about the 1/13/14 gaffe when de León talked about "ghost guns" that fire "30 magazine clips in half a second" keep getting deleted. The incident was important and notable, both to the national debate over gun control and to Senator de León. I think it would be wise to add maybe just a sentence or two about the incident. Some of the passages deleted were clearly biased attempts to mock the Senator, but I think that a very brief mention could be written in an objective way and would add relevant information to the article. There are also numerous sources that confirm the occurrence of the gaffe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.221.144.98 (talk) 13:57, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Controversies section
The current controversies section reads as follows:
| “ | Kevin de León has denied involvement in an ongoing scandal of illegal payments/bribes, and federal investigation of his fellow CA Senator Ronald S. Calderon. Kevin de León denied involvement in the scandal, in December 2013. As of July 2014, de León has not been charged with any wrongdoing in relation to the Calderon case. A letter was released by the assistant U.S. attorney in charge of the case reporting that de León, "is a witness, not a target in the federal investigation." California's political watchdog has decided not to investigate de León, saying there is no evidence he played a role in the $25,000 payment to Calderon's brother's group. In 2013, de Leon was involved in a junket to Norway and Sweden paid for by the California Foundation for Economy and Environment which has paid thousands of dollars over the years for such junkets that do seem to result in any legisation. | ” |
The first "controversy" does not belong in the biography since he has not been charged with any wrongdoing. The second "controversy" is also not really biographical since legislators go on junkets all the time. I am hereby deleting this section. Victor Victoria (talk) 11:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Personal Life
It appears his daughter is using his page for self-promotion, edits should be made. I'm not sure to what extent children should be included in to wikipedia articles and to what extent that it should occur. I feel that what she wrote on her father's page crosses the line into using it for personal gain.
Dear Leon's Senate testimony is more political than personal. Removing it but it could be added back after reworking in a different section. Loyl1 (talk) 19:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Addressing article balance - May 2017
This article has been flagged for disputable neutrality since November 2016, and reading it it becomes clear why pretty quickly. This is a Democrat state senator whose legislation primarily addresses renewable energy, affirmative consent, immigration enforcement, gun control, and regulation to protect low-wage workers. However, of these only gun control and consent are reflected in the issues section of the article, and the gun control text that's there now reflects only legislation that was vetoed or struck down in court, none of the legislation that was signed into law. Furthermore, some of the citations in this piece cite right-wing blogs of thin credibility such as The Blaze.
Within the issues heading, the current subheadings are currently "Gun control," "Yes Means Yes," "Familial Illegal Immigration Remarks," "Janet Nguyen's Ejection from Senate Chambers," and "Accusations Toward Trump Administration of 'White Supremacy'". I propose headings more reflective of his work as a legislator.
New headings would be
- Energy and the environment: Bills that passed - SB 350, SB 535, SB 1275; current bills SB 100, SB 49, 50 51, SB 584)
- Wages and retirement savings (SB 1234 for retirement savings, and SB 3 for a $15/hour minimum wage)
- Illegal Immigration - SB 54 (Current sanctuary state bill, highly controversial), AB 60 (drivers licenses for undocumented people).
- Affirmative Consent - Existing "Yes Means Yes" section
- Gun control / gun safety (Existing content pared down to focus on legislation, as well as addressing
- Public opposition to Trump administration - Existing section about "Accusations toward Trump administration..." with more context about the Mr. de Leon's other public opposition to the Trump administration.
I'll start working on writing some thoroughly-cited copy for the new sections, but wanted to give a bit of context as we begin the process of bringing some more neutrality to this article.
NealJMD (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Name
Hi 24.10.12.152. The name "Kevin de León" is not an "error". No, it's not his legal name, but it is the name he's professionally and commonly known by. Per WP:COMMONNAME, that's the one Misplaced Pages is concerned with. Please stop changing his name to "Kevin Leon". I have added mention of his legal name to the page, which I trust should satisfy you. Kawnhr (talk) 16:34, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Sections "Declined"
I also declined. Am I allowed to add my name?
IOW, why is this not blatant NPOV/non-notable? 91.10.56.218 (talk) 02:07, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't even know what you mean. The word "declined" isn't used once on the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Controversy Sections Deleted
As it stands, the current article is written like an advertisement for a political candidate and does not include any mention of scandals or controversies which have received considerable media attention. These issues need to be mentioned somehow, if not through a "controversy" section. I'd suggest changing "Political Positions" to a section about his tenure as an elected official to include controversial actions.--ILovetoEditWikis (talk) 04:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- Reading this article about Tony Mendoza, I don't believe that belongs on this article at all. It's a scandal of Mendoza's, not de Leon's. The fact that they used to room together does not make it reflect on de Leon. Per WP:BRD, I don't appreciate that you reinserted the material after waiting, what, 12 hours for a response here? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- Appreciate the clarification on WP:BRD as I'm new to editing. I was hoping adding the content back would make it clearer that I'm attempting to move the article to a more neutral place, instead of a it reading like an advertisement. You mention the Mendoza scandal as not relevant, yet all other scandals and controversies were also removed. The Mendoza, Cadiz and nepotism scandals received significant media coverage and should be mentioned somewhere in this article. In particular the Mendoza scandal directly implicated de Leon as one of the incidents was alleged to occur in de Leon's own home. Also, de Leon killed legislation (and then had his political allies kill additional legislation) that would have allowed Mendoza's victims to come forward sooner. Mendoza and de Leon were close friends and political allies. There has also been significant media coverage of this and its implication on de Leon's political future . I respectfully ask that we find a way to make this page less biased and discuss the totality of de Leon's political career, not just highlight his top accomplishments.--ILovetoEditWikis (talk) 17:50, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- Start-Class Los Angeles articles
- Unknown-importance Los Angeles articles
- Los Angeles area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
- Start-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles