This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Al Franken article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4Auto-archiving period: 60 days
![]() |
![]() | Al Franken 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " In the news" column on July 8, 2009. | |||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on May 21, 2017, and May 21, 2021. |
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.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. 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. |
Franken obviously desired public service because he became a high-level public servant. Thus, his bio should include the steps he took to avoid the Vietnam draft and remain in college during the war. His biography depicts him as physically fit (a wrestler) and cognitively capable (scholastic aptitude test scores given), so what did this aspiring public servant do about his opportunity to serve the public in the biggest war of his lifetime? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
An IP editor removed text quoted from the Jane Mayer New Yorker article in sources and disparaged her reporting. I note that her Wikipedia article notes nine awards conferred and that she was a finalist for a tenth. Activist ( talk) 18:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
It seems like there may be some back and forth edit warring over the inclusion of the words inhuman (not really a word) and rightly in the second paragraph of the introduction on the sexual misconduct accusation against sen. franken. Thankfully both words have been removed and just want to a blurb about why I think they shouldn't be included, inhuman is a weird way to frame sexual misconduct as it adds another unnecessary descriptor onto action that are already wrong and rightly assumes that fraken has been convicted of what is being alleged, which he has not. like it or not all of the accusations right now are just that and wikipedia shouldn't take a stand on whether they are right or not. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 03:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Gandydancer, I feel like this line which I had added, "pretending to grope (or possibly actually groping)" [1] accurately reflects the sum of the RS. "Pretending to grope" alone [2] is not what most RS say, but the full quote covers everything.
She had, unlike so many other victims of harassment, hard evidence. This was not a case of her word against his, he said against she said; Tweeden had, via that photo of Franken groping and grinning, the receipts."Al Franken, That Photo, and Trusting the Women", Atlantic [4] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 12:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC) Kolya Butternut ( talk) 14:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
If Al Franken had been a Republican politician, would there be any debate as to whether he touched versus groping? This semantic discussion seems like a vain effort at exculpation given his liberal credentials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Since it's a still [image], we don't know what he did before or after. So the safest thing is to say he touched her chest. We can't assume that Franken squeezed her chest, or moved his hands in a groping movement, or touched her in this one movement and withdrew his hands. "Groping" implies action. The safest and most accurate course is to say that the photo clearly shows him touching her chest with his hands cupped (while mugging for the camera, maybe). That's descriptive of the photo and avoids any journalistic assumption of what the action was.
photographed pretending to grope her breasts while appearing to touch her chest.What do you think? Kolya Butternut ( talk) 13:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
On the flight back from the tour, Franken was also photographed pretending to grope her breasts by reaching out to touch her chest while she...It sounds like we may be at an impasse, so we may need a third opinion. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 13:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
reaching out to touch her chestis perfect because it doesn't necessarily mean that he touched her, but would be accurate if he did. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 14:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I have undone the recent edits, which appear to go against the NPOV version that was hashed out by many editors over an extended period of time and work. Recent edits also suppress text that reflected Democratic congressional regret RE: Sen. Gillebrand initiative. SPECIFICO talk 14:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Continued at #11:42, 8 September 2020 version, below.
This topic was split off from #Text for Tweeden photo: groping, pretending, hovering, touching, reaching chest/breasts?#Recent edits reverted, above.
I just now made an edit (two: the second one fixed a typo in the citation) to add a duplicate citation somewhere that seemed lacking, then I changed my mind and thought maybe it wasn't as necessary as I'd thought. This is when I learn you can't even roll back your own edits without special permissions (oops), so I'm not sure if I should try to modify it back to the way it was, or just wait for somepony else to do a proper revert (if they feel it needs reverting, anyway—maybe I was right the first time). TricksterWolf ( talk) 00:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Al Franken article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4Auto-archiving period: 60 days
![]() |
![]() | Al Franken 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " In the news" column on July 8, 2009. | |||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on May 21, 2017, and May 21, 2021. |
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.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. 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. |
Franken obviously desired public service because he became a high-level public servant. Thus, his bio should include the steps he took to avoid the Vietnam draft and remain in college during the war. His biography depicts him as physically fit (a wrestler) and cognitively capable (scholastic aptitude test scores given), so what did this aspiring public servant do about his opportunity to serve the public in the biggest war of his lifetime? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
An IP editor removed text quoted from the Jane Mayer New Yorker article in sources and disparaged her reporting. I note that her Wikipedia article notes nine awards conferred and that she was a finalist for a tenth. Activist ( talk) 18:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
It seems like there may be some back and forth edit warring over the inclusion of the words inhuman (not really a word) and rightly in the second paragraph of the introduction on the sexual misconduct accusation against sen. franken. Thankfully both words have been removed and just want to a blurb about why I think they shouldn't be included, inhuman is a weird way to frame sexual misconduct as it adds another unnecessary descriptor onto action that are already wrong and rightly assumes that fraken has been convicted of what is being alleged, which he has not. like it or not all of the accusations right now are just that and wikipedia shouldn't take a stand on whether they are right or not. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 03:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Gandydancer, I feel like this line which I had added, "pretending to grope (or possibly actually groping)" [1] accurately reflects the sum of the RS. "Pretending to grope" alone [2] is not what most RS say, but the full quote covers everything.
She had, unlike so many other victims of harassment, hard evidence. This was not a case of her word against his, he said against she said; Tweeden had, via that photo of Franken groping and grinning, the receipts."Al Franken, That Photo, and Trusting the Women", Atlantic [4] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 12:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC) Kolya Butternut ( talk) 14:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
If Al Franken had been a Republican politician, would there be any debate as to whether he touched versus groping? This semantic discussion seems like a vain effort at exculpation given his liberal credentials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.27.38 ( talk) 22:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Since it's a still [image], we don't know what he did before or after. So the safest thing is to say he touched her chest. We can't assume that Franken squeezed her chest, or moved his hands in a groping movement, or touched her in this one movement and withdrew his hands. "Groping" implies action. The safest and most accurate course is to say that the photo clearly shows him touching her chest with his hands cupped (while mugging for the camera, maybe). That's descriptive of the photo and avoids any journalistic assumption of what the action was.
photographed pretending to grope her breasts while appearing to touch her chest.What do you think? Kolya Butternut ( talk) 13:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
On the flight back from the tour, Franken was also photographed pretending to grope her breasts by reaching out to touch her chest while she...It sounds like we may be at an impasse, so we may need a third opinion. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 13:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
reaching out to touch her chestis perfect because it doesn't necessarily mean that he touched her, but would be accurate if he did. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 14:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I have undone the recent edits, which appear to go against the NPOV version that was hashed out by many editors over an extended period of time and work. Recent edits also suppress text that reflected Democratic congressional regret RE: Sen. Gillebrand initiative. SPECIFICO talk 14:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Continued at #11:42, 8 September 2020 version, below.
This topic was split off from #Text for Tweeden photo: groping, pretending, hovering, touching, reaching chest/breasts?#Recent edits reverted, above.
I just now made an edit (two: the second one fixed a typo in the citation) to add a duplicate citation somewhere that seemed lacking, then I changed my mind and thought maybe it wasn't as necessary as I'd thought. This is when I learn you can't even roll back your own edits without special permissions (oops), so I'm not sure if I should try to modify it back to the way it was, or just wait for somepony else to do a proper revert (if they feel it needs reverting, anyway—maybe I was right the first time). TricksterWolf ( talk) 00:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)