Jump to content

Talk:Sam Brinton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Daily Wire

[edit]

Hey, @Thenewsoftoday, let's not source negative stuff in a BLP to Daily Wire. The reason we didn't update this before was that the sources weren't great. Valereee (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Will note. Thenewsoftoday (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3rd arrest

[edit]

He has been arrested for stealing women’s luggage three times and is charged with grand larceny 2600:1700:AC1C:4000:C06C:5DEB:8BC1:D224 (talk) 03:02, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Timetable

[edit]

The exact timetable of Brinton's employment with the feds does not seem clear from the available sources. MonMothma (talk) 17:47, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have this source[1] in the article saying the start was in June 2022, and then the CNN article[2] quotes Brinton's Twitter placing the date as June 17th. Also I'm also noticing the number of sources is down from 53 to 49 which seems to go against WP:PRESERVE and now we have a massive gap in their nuclear engineering career from 2016-2022 which doesn't improve the page. BBQboffin (talk) 23:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which organization of article material is better?

[edit]

@MonMothma made a large-scale edit to the page today to this[3], and while I appreciate WP:BOLD, I am concerned about the removal of long-standing content/sources and the rewriting of the lede (Brinton is best known for their DoE work). I reverted the edits to yesterday's version [4] which I think is a superior presentation of the material and the combined efforts of many editors. BBQboffin (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at those, too, BBQ. I think MM made some definite improvements, such as this one, but like you I was a bit overwhelmed by such a major reorganization, and while I had decided to move on, I wasn't surprised to see the reversion. Maybe we could do this a bit more slowly, perhaps with some tags first? MM, since you're fairly new, please understand this isn't really a reflection on your work or a rejection of it! It's very typical for a major edit to a BLP that falls into two contentious topics. Valereee (talk) 11:52, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does the writer of this think Sam is two people? he/she keeps referring to one person as they, their. It's really confusing.

[edit]

Does the writer of this think Sam is two people? he/she keeps referring to one person as they, their. It's really confusing. 98.184.109.134 (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is not one writer; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. However, we are obliged to follow the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Gender identity policy on this article, and so we use the singular they pronoun in reference to this article subject. BBQboffingrill me 16:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, IP. The article explains in the Sam_Brinton#Personal_life section that they use singular they pronouns. Valereee (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may be more useful to replace "they" with "Brinton", which keeps gender ambiguity, but is singular. "They" does make it confusing as if this is referring to more than one person (which it is not). 71.223.77.77 (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In English, 'they' has long been commonly understood to refer to a single person whose gender is not known/specified. English speakers understand things like "Each diner picks up their own plate and chooses where they want to sit" instead of "Each diner picks up his or her own place and chooses where he or she wants to sit". In recent years this usage has been extended to individuals who prefer they/them pronouns. Confusion is unlikely among native English speakers. Valereee (talk) 17:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]