Talk:Marjorie Taylor Greene

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marjorie Taylor Greene 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 Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 90 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, 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.

Editing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q: Why does the article call Greene "far-right"?

Consensus is that multiple, independent, reliable sources describe Greene as "far-right". These include the following:

Sources

Fram, Alan; Slodysko, Brian; Freking, Kevin (February 4, 2021). "Divided House officially removes Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from committees, punishing far-right provocateur for violent, racist rhetoric". Chicago Tribune. Associated Press. Archived from the original on June 21, 2021. Retrieved June 27, 2021.
Diaz, Daniella; Grayer, Annie; Nobles, Ryan; LeBlanc, Paul (April 17, 2021). "Marjorie Taylor Greene launching 'America First' caucus pushing for 'Anglo-Saxon political tradition'". CNN. Archived from the original on June 16, 2021. Conservative Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene is launching a new "America First" caucus, her office confirmed Friday, bringing together a group of far-right lawmakers known for their controversial rhetoric
Woodward, Alex (January 29, 2021). "Cori Bush explains moving her office away from Marjorie Taylor Greene as GOP congresswoman slams 'Democrat mob'". The Independent. Retrieved February 1, 2021. Black congresswoman condemns far-right lawmaker's 'renewed, repeated antagonisation of the movement for Black lives'
Bump, Philip (March 19, 2021). "The emerging far-right 'no' caucus in the House". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on March 20, 2021. Retrieved March 20, 2021.
Sarlin, Benjy (January 14, 2021). "Some Democrats in Congress are worried their colleagues might kill them". NBC News. Archived from the original on May 27, 2021. Retrieved February 1, 2021. House members openly accuse far-right representatives of threatening their health and safety after the Capitol riot.
Karni, Annie; Baker, Mike (February 1, 2021). "An emboldened extremist wing is flexing its power in a leaderless G.O.P.". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 15, 2021. Retrieved February 1, 2021. With the departure of former President Donald J. Trump, the G.O.P. has become a leaderless party, with past standard-bearers changing their voter registrations, luminaries like Senator Rob Portman of Ohio retiring, and far-right extremists like Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia building a brand on a web of dangerous conspiracy theories.
Elliott, Josh K. (January 29, 2021). "'Jewish space laser' among wild hoaxes backed by GOP's Marjorie Taylor Greene". Global News. Archived from the original on June 21, 2021. Retrieved February 1, 2021. Greene was an active far-right conspiracy theorist before her election, and she has continued to push many of those beliefs, including the QAnon hoax.
Gambino, Lauren (February 6, 2021). "Who is the Republican extremist Marjorie Taylor Greene?". The Guardian. Archived from the original on July 22, 2021. Retrieved August 1, 2021. Greene represents an ascending far-right movement within the Republican ranks…

Q: Why does the article call Greene a "conspiracy theorist"?

Consensus is that multiple, independent, reliable sources describe Greene as an advocate or promoter of a "conspiracy theory" or a "conspiracy theorist". See RFC closed with consensus to keep[1] These include the following:

Sources

Full coverage

Judd, Alan (September 7, 2020). "Georgia's Marjorie Taylor Greene riding political fringe to Congress". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Chattanooga Times Free Press. Retrieved June 27, 2022. For the past three years, Greene has used a network of far-right websites and social media accounts to spread baseless, often absurd conspiracy theories that demonize Trump's political enemies while raising her profile among extremist groups.
Strauss, Daniel (September 18, 2020). "QAnon conspiracy theorist to feel warm embrace of Republicans in Congress". The Guardian. Retrieved January 14, 2021. As she has run for Congress, Greene has continued to use social media such as Facebook and Twitter to spread conspiracy theories and boost the far right.
Maclean, Dave (August 12, 2021). "Trump endorses QAnon supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene after Republican primary win". The Independent. London, England. Retrieved January 14, 2021. Donald Trump has endorsed QAnon conspiracy theorist Marjorie Taylor Greene....
Morin, Rebecca; Jackson, David; Brown, Matthew (September 18, 2020). "Twitter temporarily suspends account of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene". USA Today. Archived from the original on January 24, 2021. Retrieved January 24, 2021. Greene is a firebrand conspiracy theorist who has claimed the United States is experiencing an 'Islamic invasion into our government offices,' ....
"Conspiracy theorist's apparent rise to Congress" (Video). CNN. Archived from the original on January 24, 2021. Retrieved January 24, 2021. Greene has left a trail of her own videos, Tweets, and social media posts that establish her as a bigoted anti-Islamic conspiracy theorist who recently also believed in the QAnon conspiracies.
Zanona, Melanie; Mutnick, Ally; Bresnahan, John (August 13, 2020). "McCarthy faces QAnon squeeze". Politico. Retrieved January 24, 2021. The rise of Greene – an unapologetic QAnon conspiracy theorist who has made disparaging remarks about Jews, Blacks, and Muslims – is threatening to hurt the entire party....
Herbert, Geoff (January 21, 2021). "Georgia's Marjorie Taylor Greene files articles of impeachment against Biden". al.com. Retrieved January 24, 2021. The Trump loyalist and QAnon conspiracy theorist accused Biden of 'abuse of power' ....
Bethea, Charles (October 9, 2020). "How the 'QAnon Candidate' Marjorie Taylor Greene Reached the Doorstep of Congress". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on October 9, 2020. Retrieved June 27, 2022. A spate of articles in the national media followed, all of them highlighting that a QAnon supporter was likely headed to Congress, at which point Greene made a few efforts to shed the conspiracist label.
Kruse, Michael (February 25, 2021). "'Nobody Listened To Me': The Quest to Be MTG". Politico Magazine. Retrieved June 27, 2022. What she did was start in 2017 to create a new identity—as an anti-media, anti-Muslim, anti-trans, pro-gun, pro-wall, pro-Trump provocateur, columnist and conspiracist.

From colleagues

Garvey, Declan (August 14, 2020). "Marjorie Greene Is Already Causing Problems for the GOP". The Dispatch. Retrieved June 27, 2022. 'Greene could have a devastating impact on the Republican party at-large,' a top House GOP aide texted The Dispatch. 'It's one thing to have fringe members who represent very ideological districts. It's quite another to have a member who is an avowed conspiracy theorist and traffics in hateful rhetoric that offends the vast majority of Americans.'
Proctor, Stephen (June 28, 2021). "Republican congressman says Marjorie Taylor Greene 'doesn't do anything' but 'try to be famous'". CNN Newsroom With Pamela Brown. Yahoo! Entertainment. Retrieved June 27, 2022. [GOP Representative Adam] Kinzinger said[,] 'She really doesn't do anything but travel the country and attack people, but, you know — come up with crazy conspiracy theories, and try to be famous.'
Wise, Alana (February 1, 2021). "McConnell Slams Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Conspiracies As 'Loony Lies'". NPR. Retrieved June 27, 2022. 'Loony lies and conspiracy theories are cancer for the Republican Party and our country. Somebody who's suggested that perhaps no airplane hit the Pentagon on 9/11, that horrifying school shootings were pre-staged, and that the Clintons crashed JFK Jr.'s airplane is not living in reality,' [GOP Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell said in a short statement Monday night that doesn't directly cite [Greene] by name.

Q: Why does the article call Greene's ideas "extremist"?

See a closed discussion where there was a consensus to call her ideas "extremist."[2]

Sources

"Marjorie Taylor Greene is spending more on security than any other candidate". The Independent. 2022-05-27. Retrieved 2022-09-05.
"Meghan McCain calls Marjorie Taylor Greene "a freak" over Buttigieg remarks". Newsweek. 2022-03-27. Retrieved 2022-09-05.
Cohen, Marshall. "Marjorie Taylor Greene testifies for more than 3 hours". CNN. Retrieved 2022-09-05.
Tamkin, Emily (2021-02-05). "Why Republicans are standing by extremist Marjorie Taylor Greene". New Statesman. Retrieved 2022-09-05.
"GOP on defense as Democrats harness party's ties to extremism". ABC News. Retrieved 2022-09-05.
"Georgia Senate Runoff 2021". POLITICO. Retrieved 2022-09-05.

Marjorie Taylor Greene has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 29, 2021. (Reviewed version).

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.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Women in Red: #1day1woman (2020)

This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2020. 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 articles

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Georgia (U.S. state) Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)...
Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category.
Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data
Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state)
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state)
Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs.
Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting
- Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention
- Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
- Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner.
- Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. 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 articles
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 Mid-importance).

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Congress High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

United States: 50,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	United States portal 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 Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was created or improved during this WikiProject's 50,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help!

Women in Business Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business on Wikipedia. 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 in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

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:

January 24 to 30, 2021 (21st)
January 31 to February 6, 2021 (4th)

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Rogers, Kaleigh (2021-03-03). "How Marjorie Taylor Greene Won, And Why Someone Like Her Can Win Again". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved 2021-03-08.

Naughtie, Andrew (May 27, 2022). "Marjorie Taylor Greene is spending more on security than any other candidate, filings show". The Independent. Retrieved May 29, 2022.

Section sizes

Section size for Marjorie Taylor Greene (52 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	37,609	37,609
Early life and education	4,562	4,562
Early career	12,010	12,010
U.S. House of Representatives	37	77,246
Elections	19	44,561
2020	102	40,517
Primary election	15,441	15,441
Runoff election	5,679	5,679
General election	14,048	14,048
Endorsements	5,247	5,247
2022	3,172	3,172
2024	853	853
Tenure	27,263	27,263
Committee assignments	3,037	3,037
Caucus memberships	2,348	2,348
Political positions	980	178,503
Abortion	4,072	4,072
COVID-19	27,703	27,703
2020 presidential election	2,844	2,844
Foreign policy	13,999	13,999
Opioid epidemic in the United States	679	679
Gun rights	5,350	5,350
Infrastructure	3,563	3,563
LGBT rights	11,510	11,510
Race, religion, and immigration	17,797	17,797
Climate change and weather events	6,411	6,411
Evolution	1,189	1,189
Secession	3,869	3,869
Political violence and extremism	1,162	4,847
Rhetoric involving killing of opponents	3,685	3,685
Advocacy based on conspiracy theories	6,317	35,813
Pizzagate and QAnon	9,021	9,021
False flag claims	5,459	5,459
Shootings	7,714	7,714
Georgia Guidestones bombing	842	842
White genocide conspiracy theory	2,005	2,005
Camp Fire conspiracy theory	4,455	4,455
Catholic Church leadership	2,457	2,457
Responses	18	35,420
Within Congress	9,411	15,331
Removal from House Committee assignments	5,389	5,389
House Speaker removal efforts	531	531
Outside Congress	8,538	20,071
Student loan forgiveness	599	599
Twitter	8,808	8,808
2022 primary ballot challenges	2,126	2,126
In popular culture	6,990	6,990
Personal life	6,090	6,090
See also	104	104
Explanatory notes	38	38
References	30	30
External links	3,191	3,191
Total	326,373	326,373

Veteran Section

Taylor-Greene’s Veteran Section was Removed. Please re-add:

Veterans

The PACT ACT which expanded VA benefits to veterans exposed to toxic chemicals during their military service, received a "nay" from Taylor-Greene^[1] Regarding cannabis, despite lobbying from VSOs such as the DAV,^[2] Taylor-Greene also voted against 2022 MORE Act.^[3] Twillisjr (talk) 14:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC) Twillisjr (talk) 14:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202257
^ "DAV Magazine July/August 2023 Page 5". www.qgdigitalpublishing.com.
^ https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/189785/marjorie-greene/101/marijuana

She has opposed many things, what makes this any more due than any of the others? Slatersteven (talk) 15:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One would expect a right wing politician to support the forces and ex-servicemen and women. The fact that that she voted against benefits for those service people who have suffered their job seems to me therefore seems remarkable. Maybe the conservative urge to save public money beats this in her mind. I pas no comment on the cannabis point.Spinney Hill (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it most of the GOP voted against it, it does not seem that remarkable. Slatersteven (talk) 09:33, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot say it is remarkable because her vote fails to support veterans. That's something that requires a reliable source. TFD (talk) 13:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that swings the argument your waySpinney Hill (talk) 21:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slatersteven are you volunteering to add it to an article such as: Republican Party (United States)? Twillisjr (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No I am saying do not add it here. Slatersteven (talk) 21:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove or loosen 1RR Consensus Required

It's been over a year since this arbitration remedy was applied, it's election year, and given the edit history it seems that ~~1RR~~ consensus required arbitration remedy has had significant chilling effects on this articles editorial activity. Would replacing such restrictions with BRD or 3RR enforcements be more appropriate? Is it normal for restrictive arbitration remedies to remain indefinitely on BLPs? Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to be 1RR on this page? There's a "don't re-revert without consensus on the talk page", which I think is more than apt given the contentious nature of the article and the previous issues that've risen with it. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 13:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're correct, after looking at the arbitration discussion it's clear to me now that there's a difference. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why remove it? Slatersteven (talk) 13:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I mentioned some reasoning above, page edit activity has been reduced significantly since the introduction of the restrictions, and it's still unclear to me as to whether such restrictions remaining indefinitely are the norm. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:12, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well as it has seen a reduction, its means its working as intended, that is not a reason to remove it, and it not being usual is also not really a very good reason (also there are other pages where this is also the case, any way). Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily believe reducing the editorial activity on a BLP is a good thing, or requiring lengthy consensus gaining discussions being required for every change that someone happens to disagree with (which, fwiw, violates the spirit of WP:ONUS). However, I haven't tested this theory, I believe this article has a lot of WP:TRIVIA and should be cleaned up, but with such restrictions in place what is stopping someone from just reverting the change and invoking the remedy? Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was imposed to stop edit warring, I see no reason to assume it will not start up again if it is removed or weakened, she still remains highly controversial. Slatersteven (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right label in first sentence.

@Jeppiz @Slatersteven @Ser! Pinging relevant parties.

It does not matter if her being far-right is "well sourced"; it should not be in the first sentence. I have read a lot of politician's articles and I have never seen their political leaning in the first sentence. Barack Obama and Donald Trump's pages don't call them centrists in the first sentence. There is no reason of labelling her as far-right in the first-sentence unless you would like to discredit her immediately, which is against Wikipedia policy. Alexysun (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the consensus was that we do not call her far-right, but just described as far-right. But it has been a while. Slatersteven (talk) 19:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a consensus, it should be easy to find on this talk page or its archives. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1214563816 was (reinstated?) in March 2024 by @Ser!. I don't recall there ever being a formal RfC, but at this point, I'm of the opinion that putting labels like "far-left" or "far-right" in the opening sentence of BLPs is almost no different than asserting someone is a Communist or a Nazi. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "far-right" label has no less than eleven reliable sources, and frankly you could find dozens, if not hundreds, more as well. Or alternatively, just read the article. I am not a massive fan of labelling people as "far-right" or "far-left", but with a small minority of people you simply have to call a spade a spade. Black Kite (talk) 19:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with you here; as far as I can tell, Greene has never publicly contested this label either. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be correct that there was no RfC held (though there were separate ones on "conspiracy theorist" and "extremist conspiracy theories"), but the great deal of established editors responding to edit requests demanding its removal formed a pretty strong consensus for it. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 19:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KC, There have been millions of communists and Nazis over the years. Those adjectives exist for the purpose of applying them to their associated objects. × SPECIFICO talk 18:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When has anyone called Obama or Trump a "centrist"? Why do you assume that using a well-sourced label is "discrediting"? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump and Barack Obama are notable for the office they held. MTG is notable for the political positions she espouses, those being far-right ones, and that being a descriptor that's near universally used in talking about her in reliable sources. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 19:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In order to put it in the lead, there is a requirement not only to show sources, but to show that is how she is typically described in reliable sources. TFD (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MTG is best known for being a far-right politician, and we have tons of reliable sources describing her as far-right. Outside of the US, at least, MTG is only known for her far-right politics. Jeppiz (talk) 20:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest issue I have with modern news outlets punting around the term far-right is that it means something entirely different in modern context than it has historically. I don't consider MTG a Nazi, but the captioned image on the above wiki-linked article has people literally holding a Nazi flag, a Confederate flag and a Gadsden flag, all of which represent vastly different political movements across the past 250 years (and only one of which I agree with, and that'd be the latter). Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take this subtext from Far-right_politics#United_States as an example, it's really difficult for me to find examples of MTG espousing some of the more extreme rhetorics represented in this text. However, RS says she's far-right, so I guess she is? Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. What shall be done then? Alexysun (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexysun: This song and dance has been done a million times over the last three years since I reviewed it, and the result is always the same: Marjorie Taylor Greene is quite obviously far-right; there are dozens upon hundreds of highly reliable sources to pull from calling her far-right time and time again published over her entire tenure as a congresswoman; there is no dispute among reliable sources that she is far-right; and that piece of information should be in the lead on the grounds that it's one of the two most notable things about her (the other being that she's a sitting representative) and that readers would be done a disservice by not being given upfront that piece of context whose relevance is omnipresent in almost every aspect of Greene's coverage in reliable sources. Ser! is unambiguously correct here, and Wikipedia's ability to faithfully summarize reliable sources should not be impaired by what's essentially a watering-down for the appeasement of an audience who would hate reliably sourced coverage of Greene no matter what. The consensus built up over three years has been that "far-right" is fully appropriate both as a label and as a part of the first sentence. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This type of claim should be sourced to political science or sociology experts, for example people who have PhDs, teach college courses and are published in academic journals, not people with BAs in journalism. I notice that a lot of news sources last night referred to the Democrats as "the Left," but I wouldn't describe Kamala Harris as left-wing, unless I was writing Republican propaganda. TFD (talk) 15:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weather

@Spinney Hill The statement that its not clear what is meant is in the very headline of the source. Anotherperson123 (talk) 22:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes . She doesn't say who controls the weather. That may not be clear, but she is saying someone can, which is plainly ridiculous. The second source suggests who she might mean, which is even more ridiculous if that is what she should mean.. Spinney Hill (talk) 08:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you're trying to say. We could put "It's not clear who she meant", if the previous wording is in question. This is definitely stated in the source. Anotherperson123 (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202257

[2] "DAV Magazine July/August 2023 Page 5". www.qgdigitalpublishing.com.

[3] ttps://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/189785/marjorie-greene/101/marijuana

[1]

[2]

[3]