Misplaced Pages

Talk:Geoff Simpson: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:14, 28 October 2008 editHoboJones (talk | contribs)3,934 edits Expansions: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 00:47, 1 November 2008 edit undoOrpheus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers3,771 edits Arrest: new sectionNext edit →
Line 26: Line 26:


I have expanded this article considerably. Among my expansions includes a table of electoral history--complete with refs and archived URLs, since the search function probably has a volatile web search URL pattern. It is ready for the results of the 2008 election. -] (]) 04:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC) I have expanded this article considerably. Among my expansions includes a table of electoral history--complete with refs and archived URLs, since the search function probably has a volatile web search URL pattern. It is ready for the results of the 2008 election. -] (]) 04:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

== Arrest ==

I see the arrest story has been the subject of a recent content dispute, so I haven't been ] in adding it back. However, the fact that he was arrested is a matter of public record with wide news coverage - I can't see how it can be omitted from the article completely. ] (]) 00:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:47, 1 November 2008

WikiProject iconUnited States: Washington Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis 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. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
WikiProject iconBiography Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

BLP concerns

This article has been the subject of some blanking and BLP-related vandalism from a Simpson partisan (who since has been blocked). First of all, inclusion of the allegation does not violate WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, since it is only 1 paragraph and the rest of the article discusses the subject's biography. This does not violate WP:BLP, since all facts are supported by rock-solid Reliable Sources. This respects Misplaced Pages:BLP1E#Basic human dignity by only reporting details that received significant news coverage in the media. This respects WP:Libel, since nothing in the article says that Simpson actually committed a crime. Per Misplaced Pages:BLP1E#Well-known public figures, "If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article.") Also, there is balance in the article, since it includes public expressions of innocence by Simpson. If you want to remove the allegation, you will need to establish consensus on the talk page.--HoboJones (talk) 22:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Yea right. It clearly violates BLP provisions because it does not tell the full and complete story concerning Simpson's exoneration. This would be part and parcel for compliance with that protocol. Instead, you and other Republican operatives have tried to insert the text into this article to try and smear Simpson ahead of the election. The arrest has nothing to do with his political career and recieved very little press coverage. It would therefore be giving the incident undue weight to dedicate half the article's space to an allegation that was later debunked. Until a balanced statement can be written that is included within the larger context of a well written (and well sourced) biographical entry, this paragraph has absolutely no place in this article. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 22:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's some non-BLP violating and RS-backed language. It includes the arrest, Simpsons's denial of the charges, his leave of absense from his committee chairmanship, the dropped charges, and his resumption of re-election bid and chairmanship.:

On April 27, 2008, Simpson was arrested and charged in King County District Court with fourth-degree assault and interfering with a domestic violence report after an altercation with his ex-wife. Simpson immediately declared the charges "unwarranted" and predicted his exoneration. On May 2, 2008, Simpson took a temporary leave from his chairmanship of the House Local Government Committee until his "legal issues are resolved." On May 28, 2008, the prosecutor in the case dropped the charges against Simpson, saying that he "no longer believes there is sufficient evidence to proceed with the charges." Simpson said that he would resume both his re-election bid and his committee chairmanship.

  1. ^ "WA lawmaker charged with assault". Seattle Times. 2008. Archived from the original on 2008-10-26. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |accessmonthday= ignored (help); Unknown parameter |accessyear= ignored (|access-date= suggested) (help)
  2. Heffner, Emily (2008-05-01). "Official faces domestic-assault charge". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 2008-10-26. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
  3. "State lawmaker charged with assault". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. 2008-04-30. Archived from the original on 2008-10-26. Retrieved 2008-10-27. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ "Domestic violence charges against legislator dropped". The Daily Herald (Everett, Washington). 2008-06-01. Archived from the original on 2008-10-26. Retrieved 2008-10-27. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  5. Postman, David (2008-05-02). "Rep. Simpson takes temporary leave of committee post". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 200-10-26. Retrieved 2008-10-27. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |archivedate= (help)
  • No. You use soft language when you talk about dropping charges, saying not that Simpson wasn't guilty but including a quote from the prosecutor saying there wasn't enough evidence. Again, this presumes guilt but cites a lack of evidence for trying the case. You also spend a lot of time talking about his temporary resignation of committee posts to try and give weight to the charges, for which there was none. You can try rewriting it again, but I strongly oppose this draft. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 23:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
That's not my "soft language," that is the prosecutor's soft language. He is explaining why he dropped the charges. --HoboJones (talk) 00:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • No, it's soft language because it equivocates on the factual basis of Simpson's innocence. If you want to include this in the article you're going to have to another way to phrase this, other than "he's innocent because the prosecutor couldn't find a way to try the case." Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
There is no "factual basis of Simpson's innocence." The prosecutor didn't say "He is innocent." The prosecutor said" There's not enough evidence to take this to trial." There is a difference, and I have the WP:RS to back up my claim.--HoboJones (talk) 01:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • The prosecutor has an inherent and irrefutable bias in the case, they are the agent who is attempting to take the case to trial. Trying to hide behind the assumed authority of their message is another weak attempt to insert a POV. Simpson is innocent of those charges. Trying to frame that within the context of the prosecutor's statement on the issue is a blatant BLP violation. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 01:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I disagree. But, for the sake of consensus, would you agree to the language above with "saying that he 'no longer believes there is sufficient evidence to proceed with the charges.'" removed?--HoboJones (talk) 02:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
  • No. There is no evidence that an altercation actually took place, so putting that in the opening sentence is both original research and a BLP violation. None of the sources support that. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 02:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Expansions

I have expanded this article considerably. Among my expansions includes a table of electoral history--complete with refs and archived URLs, since the search function probably has a volatile web search URL pattern. It is ready for the results of the 2008 election. -HoboJones (talk) 04:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Arrest

I see the arrest story has been the subject of a recent content dispute, so I haven't been hasty in adding it back. However, the fact that he was arrested is a matter of public record with wide news coverage - I can't see how it can be omitted from the article completely. Orpheus (talk) 00:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Geoff Simpson: Difference between revisions Add topic