Jump to content

Talk:Symone Sanders-Townsend/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

I restored this content

In November 2016 on CNN, Sanders said that violence against black people was a “hate crime” but violence against white people was “protesting.” When asked about a recent video of blacks assaulting a white man because he voted for Donald Trump, Sanders sarcastically said "Oh my goodness - poor white people!"[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Bk33725681 (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Symone Sanders on CNN, November 2016
  2. ^ CNN’s Sanders Mocks Chicago Man Beaten for Trump Support: ‘Poor White People’], Breitbart, November 14, 2016
  3. ^ CNN Commentator FREAKS OUT: ‘Oh My Goodness, Poor White People!’, Daily Caller, November 14, 2016
  4. ^ Dem. Strategist on Trump Supporter Being Assaulted: 'Oh My Goodness, Poor White People', Mrctv, November 14, 2016
  5. ^ Dem Strategist Slams White Trump Supporter Beaten by Black Chicago Men: 'Poor White People!', Newsbusters, November 14, 2016
  6. ^ Dem Strategist Mocks Trump Supporter Beat Up By Mob: ‘Oh My Goodness, Poor White People!’, Mediaite, November 14, 2016
I've removed. Breitbart, The Daily Caller, MRC TV, and Newsbusters are not reliable sources, especially for this BLP. You can take to WP:RSN if you want. The YouTube interview is a primary source and so should used with caution. Mediaite is iffy. In any case, the first sentence of the text is an extrapolation of what she said; she didn't say that. I have substantial concerns about weight as well, not least because the quote seems to be taken out of its context. Neutralitytalk 18:14, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
I endorse Neutrality's actions here - if you think Breitbart and Newsbusters (wildly partisan right-wing house organs with zero journalistic credibility) are acceptable sources for claims about a person that source is obviously politically opposed to, you need to take a refresher course on our reliable sourcing policies. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
User:NorthBySouthBaranof, you're going to have to understand how Wikipedia uses sources if you wish to edit articles. Just because Breitbart is "partisan right-wing blah blah opinions" doesn't mean it isn't a valid source. Please read the Biased or opinionated sources section of Wikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources. Archer Rafferty (talk) 02:44, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
You have made a grand total of 127 edits on the encyclopedia; I suggest that it is you who needs to review our policies and guidelines. There is a longstanding consensus that Breitbart's long history of fabrications, lies, misstatements and intentional misrepresentation of the truth, usually as relates to people whom it politically opposes, makes it unsuitable for use as a source anywhere on the encyclopedia except where it may be used to source statements about itself - such as our article on Breitbart News. It is categorically unacceptable for use in this article, the biography of a living person to whom Breitbart is indisputably politically opposed. Please review our policies and guidelines, and if you believe you have good reason to overturn this consensus, you are of course welcome to start the 119235325th thread on this matter on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I suggest a reevaluation if you think pointing out the total number of edits I've made is somehow related to this topic. You need to understand a lot of news companies have a long list of times where they've either lied, misquoted, or misrepresented someone but are still sources, I wouldn't bar CNN as a source just because they've had a history of doing so such as the recent case where they openly called Julian Assange a pedophile. Now, your bland "review our policies and guidelines" isn't providing anything to this but filler, again, please read this actual policy concerning Biased or opinionated sources on the Wikipedia:Identifying Reliable Sources. Archer Rafferty (talk) 22:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

it took me all of 10 seconds to move from r/The_Donald to here, another instance of Archer disputing how WP:RS is supposed to work. NorthBySouthBaranof and Neutrality are 100% correct. Briebart, by long-standing community consensus is NOT a reliable source. The RS policy is well-established and if you continue to butt heads over this (no matter the article) your editing career will soon be at an end.That man from Nantucket (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

The user in question is now indeffed for personal attacks and being generally not here to collaboratively build an Internet encyclopedia, so I think we can close this thread. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 00:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Somehow I dont think that's the last we hear about this. But I'm a pessimist.That man from Nantucket (talk) 01:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
No. This should not be closed as finished. Sanders' publicly expressed racism in her public capacity as a Democratic Party political operative, paltry as her resume may be, is worth mentioning. If a white person were accused of making similar comments, he or she would be pillories by the media, forced to apologize or resign, and the ensuing coverage would then make the whole thing notable per se. Since the mainstream media did nothing of the kind with Sanders, ... Hmmmmm. Quis separabit? 17:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The passage in question is "Sanders argued that the 2017 Chicago torture incident was not a hate crime". That's not racism, that is just a statement. Right-wing talking heads of course feel it is racism, as they usually do. That position is fringe to the point of irrelevance. TheValeyard (talk) 17:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm not seeing any reliable source describe her comments as racism or racist; if I've missed one, please cite it. For us to call something racist without a reliable source is not kosher. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Breitbart should never be used as a reliable unless unless when attributing opinion/viewpoint/commentary. Here is the 2018 consensus; and here are at least 2 discussions about the same topic 2014 and 2015.Tamsier (talk) 22:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)


Add racist to opening line or political views?

The racist tag is in the opening line for David Duke. Should it be noted here as well, for the sake of consistency? Nikolaneberemed (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

No!Tamsier (talk) 22:12, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

No relation?

Should we mention whether or not she is related to Bernie Sanders given that she came to prominence working for him? 2600:1014:B00C:5C36:905D:6000:AE82:29DA (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

After Biden sex assault allegations surfaced, Symone Sanders deleted her Brett Kavanaugh tweets regarding Me-too.

After Biden sex assault allegations surfaced, Symone Sanders deleted her Brett Kavanaugh tweets regarding Me-too. [1] , [2]

Glenn Greenwald is Pulitzer Prize winning writer. He is certainly a reliable source.

Cox wasan (talk) 20:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1244672687408021507?lang=en/
  2. ^ https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2020/03/31/ill-be-darned-looks-like-symone-d-sanders-tried-to-memory-hole-her-brett-kavanaugh-tweets-after-her-boss-joe-biden-was-accused-of-sexual-assault-screenshots/
Twitter is not a reliable source. Even then, deleted tweets are not encyclopedic information. If she decides to make her own statement, then that’s something worth including. ⌚️ (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Symone_Sanders-Townsend/Archive_1&oldid=1127001933"