Talk:Kamala Harris 2020 presidential campaign/Archive 1

Archive 1

Info being removed by user

Hi,

I added back info in this edit: [1] that I think is relevant. The same user:Silver181, removed the info again here: [2]. I'd like to discuss the issue here instead of getting into an edit war. David O. Johnson (talk) 18:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

The info that I removed was added by user:Ed. Jishnu, who also added biased information to Harris' main Wikipedia page. On both pages, the edits that he/she made were clearly intended to portray Harris in a negative light, all but accusing her of supporting police brutality and changing her political positions based on what is popular with the public [3]. Most of his/her edits were removed from Harris' main page for violating WP:NPOV. As for the irrelevancy of the edits, he/she clearly tried to make it seem as though Harris was experiencing major pushback from the African-American community. The only example he/she cited was a single, fairly little-known musician. Harris is possibly going to receive pushback for her criminal justice record, but the edits made by Ed. Jishnu are clearly not neutral and would need to be heavily rephrased. Silver181 (talk) 18:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, David O. Johnson Despite claims otherwise I am not willfully making biased edits nor do I have an agenda against Ms. Harris. I am simply stating sourced facts and not making unfounded accusations. Turning a blind eye to issues regarding Kamala Harris would be biased in fact, as what user Silver181 is doing as he or she is obviously biased towards Kamala Harris as he is taking issue with highlighting issues with Ms. Harris. It was not my intention to break NPOV, I am sorry if I did I will try to peer edit it through talk pages and read the guidelines to make sure it is wholly neutral. By my And I take issue with saying my edits were 'irrelevant' as I am highlighting pertinent issues in our country and how Ms. Harris is dealing with them. In K. Michelle's defense, she is arguably one of the better known R&B singers of this current time and has a large fanbase among African Americans. Silver181 If you would like to help rephrase some of the sourced content, be my guest. I would appreciate it very much. Also, the integrity of Silver181 is of concern to me. In his entire history of editing, he has never made a sourced edit and has continually been using original research. I believe he is blatantly trying to shield Kamala Harris' image from matters. In addition, I am in the process of creating a criticism section on the Kamala Harris page as I feel the places I have been adding the facts are not quite fitting. Ed. Jishnu (talk) 23:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Firstly, I would like to say that I really don't have any opinion on Kamala Harris. I barely know anything about her other than the fact that she is a Senator from California, and my view of her is more or less entirely neutral. I don't care at all about trying to "protect her reputation." I came across this page while viewing info about the Democratic primaries and saw what I viewed as biased content. Secondly, your criticism of my "integrity" is blatantly incorrect. My account isn't very old, no, but if you bothered to actually check my edit history, you would find that I have sourced all major edits with external sources. Your claim otherwise is a bold-faced lie and makes me question your own integrity if you are willing to lie about my credibility to try to score cheap points in an argument.

Now that that is out of the way, I must say that I find it extremely hard to believe that you made your edits in good faith. You made sweeping, generalized claims like "Harris has received pushback from the African-American community" while only citing a single musician as evidence. Your edits, in my view, were clearly designed to give the false impression that Harris has received widespread condemnation from the black community at large. A much more accurate statement would be something like "Harris has received criticism from some progressives for her criminal justice record" or something along those lines. At the same time, if you make a statement like that, you also would need to cite examples of people or groups that have supported her. Only mentioning criticism of her (while also greatly exaggerating the extent of that criticism) without mentioning support that she has received is why I removed your edits in the first place. Wikipedia is not a place for you to vent your frustration with candidates or promote your agenda. If we're going to talk about criticism of her- which, don't get me wrong, we should, as some progressives have, indeed, already targeted her- we need to balance it out with mentions of support. The article in it's current state seems very neutral to me, and if it's going to stay that way, we need to be very careful about how we phrase things. Silver181 (talk) 03:34, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Remove Propaganda

Everything here is either neutral or supportive of a candidate. Why is their a section on why her candidacy is historical and not one on the many critiques that Progressives and Republicans have of her? There was so much criticism regarding her launch video and logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.29.47.4 (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, 174.29.47.4 You are absolutely right would you like to help me in drafting a criticism page of hers on the main page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed. Jishnu (talk • contribs) 13:59, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Kamala Harris Presidential Campaign Kick-Off.webm

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

"Historical significance"

Wow, is the not-even-trivia in the "Historical significance" section even vaguely signficant, much less historically so? Why not add some numerological or astrological information also? "17th oldest president?" What does most of this stuff add to our understanding of her campaign? Do we do the same thing for all candidates? ("23rd oldest and 22nd youngest", "oldest Piscean candidate ever"...) --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 00:44, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree that some of this is too much ("17th oldest" is very unnecessary), but mentions of Harris possibly becoming the first female and Asian-American president and the Shirley Chisholm homage in Harris's campaign are relevant enough to receive a mention I believe. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 00:52, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm just noting this before I zap the more egregious ones. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 01:10, 5 February 2019 (UTC)