Talk:Julia Ioffe

Trump Russian Issue

Ioffe with a Princeton degree specializing in Soviet history, her article is at a defining moment in the US Presidential history and needs inclusion, https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/07/natalia-veselnitskaya-trump-junior/533670/ --Wikipietime (talk) 11:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

About the tweet

I started to be bold but I figured it would be controversial. Regarding her tweet, the article leaves a hole mentioning only that "Ioffe issued a tweet" and then describing her apology and termination. Not that I think the tweet should necessarily be quoted but at least some brief indication of what the nature of the tweet was seems appropriate. Simply skipping over that information entirely seems like censorship.

-- MC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.131.2.3 (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I added a section detailing this situation in the Controversy section of the article. I think that it's important to quote the tweet as it is extremely relevant to her career, especially considering the consequences. --XP0401 (talk) 00:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Bibliography

I have commenced a Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 06:16, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment about antisemitic shooting

I've removed the paragraph about her controversial comment about Trump in the context of the shooting, as per WP:NOTNEWS. The comment was covered in a few stories [1] [2], but it strikes me as more gossip-y and irrelevant than e.g. her 2016 tweet about Trump which lead to her being fired. We as an encyclopedia should cover her views (see for example her article about the issue: [3]), not partisan clickbait which says more about Jake Tapper than Ioffe. Before re-adding the thing about Trump, please resist the temptation, and gain consensus here. wumbolo ^^^ 13:05, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

More than a few stories and more more important than the earlier incidents because of the context. Trump's subsequent comment, even though hardly untypical, has made it more notable. I have restored it. Philip Cross (talk) 19:50, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Trump's comments make a lot of things more notable, but Trump shoudn't dictate our NPOV. There is a number of stories are one or two stories now, yes, so I won't be removing it for the time being (WP:recentism). wumbolo ^^^ 19:57, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

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

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

• Julia Ioffe, a Russian-born American journalist who covers national security and foreign policy topics for GQ.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Foremost expert

This is one of those slippery designations that means nothing but puffs up someone the editor admires. It is not a synonym for "honest and accurate." Nicmart (talk) 13:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Then... remove it? Brycehughes (talk) 14:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Done Bangabandhu (talk) 23:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Deferring tweet controversy from Politico section

I've shortened and (IMHO) improved the paragraph in the Politico section, on Ioffe's viral tweet that got her fired. However, it is still a duplicate of material covered at greater length in the Controversies section and I wonder whether it would be better to replace all of it with a statement like "Ioffe was fired in December 2016 after posting an obscene tweet about president-elect Trump (see below)". 73.89.25.252 (talk) 06:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Maklakov

Was this article on Vasily and Nikolay Maklakov written by her?

Ioffe, G. (2012). The brothers Maklakov. 31. 68-80. Taksen (talk) 06:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

No, by Genrikh Zinovievich Ioffe (1928-). https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Иоффе,_Генрих_Зиновьевич Taksen (talk) 06:52, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Is Julia somehow related to Nadezhda Joffe?Taksen (talk) 06:08, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I also would like to know it, to Nadezhda Joffe and Adolph Joffe. Not that it would necessarily greatly affect her journalist authority or skills but perhaps it could give her access to some unique family stories and personal perspectives on the world politics. It would make her even more interesting person, although she seems to be one no matter what family relations she has. WikDarim1963 (talk) 15:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Reverted, but on dubious grounds

This paragraph was reverted, but it should go back to the article~in my point of view.Taksen (talk) 06:51, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

In 2014, Stephen F. Cohen's views on US-Russian relations were criticized by Julia Ioffe and others as being pro-Putin. Writing in The American Conservative, James W. Carden, a former advisor to the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission and soon-to-be executive editor for the American Committee for East-West Accord, described Ioffe's article as a "scurrilous — and frankly hysterical — ad hominem attack on his work and character". Carden agreed with Cohen's view that the US had failed to conduct a public debate prior to making a major shift in policy toward Russia to try to "isolate" and make it a "pariah state".

As I say in my edit summary, this passage is already in Stephen F. Cohen's Wikipedia article. As Julia Ioffe's comments are a response to Cohen, it appeared more relevant to the other article. In terms of weight, James W. Carden and Cohen have precedence. The passage refers to one article by Ioffe, but the issue is Cohen's orientation over many years. Philip Cross (talk) 07:48, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I cut the paragraph down to what I thought was relevant to Ioffe. However, an editor did not like the use of "The American Conservative" as a source. All statements were suitably attributed as required by the note in the Perennial Sources list. This is in an article in which 43 references out of 88 are to Ioffe's own articles: where until recently we were using Ioffe's Linked In profile for a claim about founding something called "Puck": where we have used four separate tweets as sources. Burrobert (talk) 14:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

(◕‿◕) Burrobert (talk) 12:09, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

References

Bibiogrpahy

Any thoughts on the Bibliography that has been tacked on to the end of the article? It contains some articles that were already mentioned in the body of the article. I removed a few articles from the body for this reason but a few duplicates remain ("The Loneliness of Vladimir Putin", "What Putin Really Wants"). Some suggestions:

- The bibliography would benefit from some trimming. E.g. do we need a link to "All Articles 2008" in the The New Yorker?

- Remove articles from the body and put them in Bibliography unless there is a good reason to mention them in the body. Much of the bio currently consists of articles written by Ioffe along with an occasional quote from the articles. When secondary coverage of an article exists, we should keep it in the body. Otherwise, I suggest transferring it to the Bibliography. This would reduce the current over-reliance on primary sources.

- The formatting of the Bibliography needs to be improved.

Burrobert (talk) 12:52, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

The entire bibliography section consists mostly of articles she has written, which seems inconsistent with articles covering journalists, see Maggie Haberman#Bibliography and Bob Woodward#Bibliography which include a list of their published books. We should replace with a list of Ioffe's published books. IIIIlIllllIllIII (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Burrobert (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)