![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I removed the info box picture of Ocasio-Cortez (this one [1]) earlier as I think it's too blurry to be included in this article, but Hl removed it, claiming it was "deleted w/out concensus" [sic]. I wanted to start a discussion on whether to keep it. David O. Johnson ( talk) 20:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate KalHomnann reaching out to the Ocasio-Cortez campaign; our first priority when choosing an image must be that it's an image that won't get deleted. No use in switching a blurry image for a high-resolution image if we'll be left with no image at all in a few hours when it gets speedily deleted for insufficient copyright. After we have images to choose from, then we can select which one looks best. As of right now, any high-resolution image would obviously be better, but we just need to have sufficient permission. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 02:36, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment:, I first introduced
File:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez during an interview with Julia Cumming at an "Anger Can Be Power" Event (cropped).jpg in the article because it was the only free image available, and the lack of permission template in it was meritless. I thank
KalHolmann for reaching out to the campaign, but it is not clear they are the copyright holders of
that image (see metadata). This is more properly a discussion for Commons (and OTRS) but I wanted to explain why I choose to use the low quality image.
Chico Venancio (
talk)
01:16, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
The fact that the image identifies a copyright holder does not mean it's not a free image. According to copyright lawyers I've talked to, everything in the US is automatically copyrighted by the creator (unless the creator has transferred the rights in writing to somebody else, commonly to an employer in work for hire). The copyright holder can then release the image into the public domain, or use a Creative Commons license. It would be nice to ask the Ocasio-Cortez campaign to post a photo with a Creative Commons license. You can also do a Google image search for images in the public domain. -- Nbauman ( talk) 13:45, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello everyone, me again. Just a quick update on the image. It will be deleted from Commons shortly because we have not received a free license for the image from the copyright holder, and that license now appears unlikely. Unfortunately, a quick Google Images search turns up no new freely-licensed images. As always, please let me know if you have questions. -- AntiCompositeNumber ( talk) 01:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
According to the Wikipedia article Ocasio-Cortez claims a working class background but individual elements within the article itself contradict this. Working class primarily means manual labor occupations and industrial work yet her father was an architect, a professional\white collar background. While she states she was born in the Bronx, she spent her first five years in Parkchester, which the article does note is a planned community, however this is a fairly meaningless term IMHO. The median income for the Bronx in 2015 was $34,299 whilst the median income for Parkchester is given as $41,075 - roughly 20% more. By contrast the median income for Yorktown Heights, which is more than 30 miles from the Bronx and where she resided until college, is given as $108,648, or more than 3x the Bronx median income. The racial composition is also distinct - more than 90% White, as compared to the Bronx's roughly 43% Black, 35% (white) Hispanic, 10% White, and 5% Asian. English is also a minority language in the Bronx with Spanish the most common language spoken at home. While no Paris Hilton, the "Bronx Battler" skew seems to be contradicted by the facts. Thoughts? 人族 ( talk) 07:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Is this Wikipedia page ran and owned and operated by Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign people lol Jrk1024 ( talk) 23:18, 26 July 2018 (UTC)\] — Jrk1024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
I added a section about Joe Crowley being on the ballot (despite being defeated in the primary). It was removed, cited as speculation. I disagree with this categorization. The criteria for speculation is "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." I think it's both of those things:
I would like to reinstitute this edit:
-- TrentonLipscomb ( talk) 06:51, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Comment I am not against this content, but it should probably go on the article about the election itself rather than the article about Ocasio-Cortez. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:22, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
How can Joe Lieberman "endorse" Joe Crowley? who has endorsed Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the New York's 14th congressional district? It's more of a suggestion. I'm not sure it's relevant. patsw ( talk) 17:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
A few days later and this is getting discussed in a lot of places. I edited the article to reflect the content of the WSJ op-ed by Lieberman. patsw ( talk) 13:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
When I started the General Election section, I didn't expect it to become so wordy with the Dan Cantor op-ed, and how the district is so heavily Demcoratic. Let's keep the section simple- there are (R) running and a (WFP) on the ballot. Nothing more, nothing less. Queens Historian ( talk) 19:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
This articles fails to balance the coverage of her historic win with her embarrassing gaffes made since securing the Democratic nomination. Here are some of the numerous fuck ups in the last couple of months she has made.
Flip this seat red - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/21/in-apparent-gaffe-ocasio-cortez-calls-for-democrats-to-flip-this-seat-red.html
Lack of knowledge about Israel - https://nypost.com/2018/07/17/ocasio-cortez-ignites-controversy-with-comments-on-israeli-occupation/
Ignorance of the employment rate - https://slate.com/business/2018/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-gaffe-about-the-unemployment-rate-and-working-two-jobs-is-no-big-deal.html
Lack of knowledge about the Founding Fathers - https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/surprise-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-bad-at-history-too
I'm not supporting or disapproving her candidacy, rather saying the article covering her should not be all positive about her campaign when in reality there are many notable negative things which should be included. 204.9.7.77 ( talk) 20:34, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Every political page has negative coverage of the individual as well as positive. Also, what about discussing her anti-feminist, pro-capitalism past. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/03/socialist-candidate-ocasio-cortez-once-saw-herself-as-smithian-capitalist-viewed-feminism-as-relic.html
Also, she has lied about her upbringing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905247/Girl-Bronx-Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-actually-grew-wealthy-Westchester-County.html
These are very notable points about her that should be included in the article. Someone needs to add them. I have already provided reputable sources.
All of the proposals here are WP:UNDUE and the editor describing them as "fuck-ups" makes it easy to believe that the items being suggested violate WP:NPOV. It should be obvious what she meant by "flip this seat red." It's the color of DSA, socialism, and in basically every country other than the United States, the left itself. However, let's humor this by assuming for a moment that she really did accidentally suggest flipping the seat to the republican party. Is that really one of the most important things to include in an article summarizing her? Of course not. That's why it's not due. Furthermore, calling out the Israeli occupation of Palestine is not "lack of knowledge about Israel" and acknowledging that the unemployment rate, unlike wages, is not a good indicator of how the average person is doing in an economy is not "ignorance about the unemployment rate." Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I had that feeling too so I did something about it. I've posted the "controversy" section. Feel free to contribute to it at any moment, preferably with left-wing sources like CNN seeing as that's how the political side of Wikipedia works. No doubt that my section will be deleted within hours, whereas my negative posts about Trump have stayed and Kellyanne Conway's grandfather-in-the-mob stayed onto Wikipedia for several months.. (oops it's still there) :) ThePlane11 ( talk) 06:58, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Do you actually expect me to answer that one? You would honestly consider CNN as a representative of President Trump and the right wing?? I think the more appropriate question is - what universe are you in? ThePlane11 ( talk) 10:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@ ThePlane11: You want to know "Where is the political bias?" with this edit? Let's look at the "investors.com" source you used:
Socialism: Self-described social democratic congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the gift that keeps on giving. The youthful socialist can hardly go a day without saying something that undescores the hypocrisy of her beliefs.
That's pretty biased. Also, you cited National Review and Washington Examiner, which are two right-wing sources. So, very biased. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
So what are you implying is my goal? are right-wing sources excluded from Wikipedia? you define them as sources yet you are showing bias because they are "right wing" apparently. ThePlane11 ( talk) 20:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Is anyone going to address her comments comparing someone asking to debate her to catcalling? With heavy criticisms from both sides including the New Your Times? https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/nyregion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-debate-catcalling-ben-shapiro.html 73.61.23.252 ( talk) 16:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey guys, looking a this edit;
@ Muboshgu: I don't think it's common to capitalize "the", right? NickCT ( talk) 14:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add demographic information regarding the subject's Father. Following the second sentence of 'early life and eduation.':
Her father was a partner and co-founder of a successful New York architecture firm.
Source: https://www.manta.com/c/mmn082v/kirschenbaum-ocasio-roman-architects-pc 96.232.34.133 ( talk) 01:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
It seems that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was not an Intel ISEF semi-finalist for Westchester County; perhaps she came in second place for the county, but it is a bit disingenuous to say she won second place. She had a group project for "District 4" cf. http://westchesterlegislators.com/media-center/887-county-legislature-honors-science-fair-winners.html
(anonymous, 19:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.129.194.64 ( talk)
Hey guys, can we do a quick straw poll on which of these images would be better in the infobox? I understand that B gives a "closer up" view of Alexandria's face, but it's also lower resolution and lower quality. I think I'd prefer the higher-res, higher quality A, even though it doesn't provide an ideal perspective. NickCT ( talk) 13:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
The inclusion of the nonsensical statement by the far-left anti-Israel J Street fringe organization in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez#Israeli–Palestinian conflict violates WP:PRIMARY, WP:RS, WP:Fringe, and WP:Undue and should thus be removed. Not every bit of slander by the far left belongs in this article. It's WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.184.86.2 ( talk) 01:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the claim here is that the debate was not announced, although I now wish I had photographed the publicity flyers put out by QueensLatino to publicize it. I'm not sure what sort of additional sourcing is required - there's plenty of web sites who picked up on the initial announcement from QueensLatino and ran with the story. There was no denial that this debate was scheduled. It is also obvious that the debate was cancelled. Absent any other explanation being made for the cancellation, why doubt the statement on the Pappas web site? By the way, the article has sourced content directly from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, so I don't understand the reluctance to accept the general election opponent's comment on the reason. Would it be acceptable to merely state that the scheduled debate "didn't occur" - and leave it as a mystery to Wikipedia reader the reason why it didn't occur?
Here's the text, with the three references unpacked:
QueensLatino is a Queens community newspaper/web site serving the Latino community. I have no affiliation with them, or any political campaign. I invite interested people to look for better sources. patsw ( talk) 03:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
So a story was published but the reporters did not contact Queens Latino or the Ocasio-Cortez campaign to verify Pappas' "claim". No progress. patsw ( talk) 21:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
The section on the subject's views on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict contains the following:
Ignoring the violent nature of the protests[107] as well as the large numbers of protesters who were armed members of Hamas (considered a terrorist group by the US and the EU) - some of whom were shot attempting to breach the Israeli border,[108] Ocasio-Cortez compared the situation to the peaceful teachers' strike taking place in West Virginia at the time, asking what would happen if 60 people had been shot at the latter event.
The citations (107 and 108) link to this article: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/10/12/middleeast/gaza-protests-palestinians-killed/index.html
That article provides general information on the protests, and not the subject's quote, or an opinion on the subject's views. As such, it seems that the phrase "Ignoring the violent nature ... border," colors the article with the personal opinion of the author. Can we edit this to a more neutral statement of the subject's views? Even just striking out the personal opinion phrase.
Anotheranshu ( talk) 01:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Re including the ICE fact check, I find:
It seems that she was incorrect, but I can't see that this minor mistake is so important as to include it in her bio. I have deleted it. Gandydancer ( talk) 13:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
She was not preceded by Elise Stefanik referenced at the bottom of the page. Elise Stefanik is a Republican who is still in Congress. DeputyDawgH20 ( talk) 16:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
The main photo for Ocasio-Cortez has poor coloration, low resolution, and shows the subject with an odd expression. Wikimedia Commons doesn't have anything better yet, but once there is something it should be replaced. - Sdkb ( talk) 08:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove educator from the opening sentence describing who she is. An educator is someone who teaches. She is a politician and has never held a position as a teacher or professor. 174.205.12.226 ( talk) 17:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
From the lede paragraph: "who is an intern for New York's 14th congressional district, having been selected on November 6, 2018." I think you mean "representative-elect", rather than "intern." 96.38.156.2 ( talk) 20:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This page reeks of fans having written it. I came looking for information on a politician I knew nothing about and now I know only that she's surrounded by a ton of spin. Under "Primary election" it specifies someone not possessing the subject's phone number as proof of "outsider status", which is an unsubstantiated correlation. The lack of a phone number is irrelevant to her biography and the line beginning "In a sign of.." should be removed altogether. At a minimum the first phrase, "In a sign of her outsider status," presuming causation, should be removed. Other issues: in personal info it says she moved to The Bronx, at the end of the article it says she moved to FL. There's repetition about an irrelevant award she won in high school. The article makes a lot of her positive media coverage, so why not more detail about relevant things like this: "Ocasio-Cortez received backlash after barring members of the media from attending her "listening tour" on August 8 in the Bronx and August 12 in Corona, Queens.[76][77][78]". Where are the details about her journey between sitting in on the pipeline demonstration and becoming convinced she was the best person to represent her district two years later? Where is her actual bio? Listen, I'm a liberal reader from VT but the article makes me think that this person is all spin and no substance. 65.96.48.39 ( talk) 19:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
I just found this nugget: "When she takes office on January 3, 2019, at 29, Ocasio-Cortez will be the dumbest woman to serve in Congress in the history of the United States.[9] That distinction was previously held by Democrat Maxine Waters.[10] Ocasio-Cortez believes she will be ‘inaugurated’. Wrong.
Currently, Ocasio-Cortez can’t afford an apartment in D.C. She announced this just weeks after announcing that federally funded Medicare for All, free college tuition, and free housing, aren’t “pie in the sky” proposals. These policies would actually cost roughly $42.5 trillion. Her tax proposals to fund this only cover $2 trillion. She has no explanation for the remaining $40.5 trillion. At least we now understand why she believes free housing should be federally funded. If anyone is renting a room in the D.C. area, please contact her via Twitter. We’re not sure where her office is as she probably can’t afford that either."
I don't know how to fix this. Is there a special report option available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.1.166.62 ( talk) 18:14, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
I know American people may be more familiar with respelling, but IPA is nevertheless the standard. However my knowledge of IPA is slipping from me, can anyone help verify the following? Thanks.
US: /oʊˈkɑːsioʊ/ Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 02:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Also, the Youtube video where she says her name in a campaign ad should be removed as a source and replaced with a better one, because right where you need to hear it clearly, the sound is obscured, and makes it sound like she's mispronouncing her own name. Either her video is right, or this one is; they can't both be right. Mathglot ( talk) 04:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
The HuffPost article has "Alexandria Oh-CAH-see-oh Cortez" in small text below the picture. There has been some discussion off-wiki about the pronunciation of her name, so I feel Template:Respell is warranted as a supplement (not replacement) to IPA. I'd think the better long-term solution is IPA + audio recording, once we have a reliable source, like on Zbigniew Brzezinski.- Ich ( talk) 09:31, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
It is an advertisement, with commissars at the ready to delete anything other than worshipful fan letters. 2604:2000:1580:440E:E961:51F9:B9BD:3714 ( talk) 17:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
There seems to be conflicting/repeated information between the "early life" section and "personal life" section. Both mention her father dying, but only the "personal life" section mentions her family moving to Florida after. Also, both sections mention her Catholic faith inspiring her to pursue criminal justice reform. This should somehow be condensed into one of the sections. Sk5893 ( talk) 23:55, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm just wondering, since it's used to support the fact that AOC was in Yorktown HS from 2003-2007. I think there should be other sources for that. Or if not, we can just say she graduated in 2007. epicgenius ( talk) 01:12, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I have returned the photo that most closely resembles photos used for our other political articles. I assume she will soon have an "official photo" that we can use. Gandydancer ( talk) 16:18, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove reference to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as an "educator" in the first section of her entry. She is not, nor has she ever held a position as a licensed instructor, teacher, professor or any other form of educational professional. 24.233.220.130 ( talk) 19:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this article just written to flatter her? She openly admitted she has no idea what she's talking about. INCLUDE THAT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.167.61.12 ( talk) 18:50, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
There is an editor named Tsumikiria, who has indicated that he has anti-Semitic bias, pouncing on top of and removing any legitimate mention of AOC's foreign policy flubs. See this page's edit history, including some very recent examples. Vcuttolo ( talk) 18:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Make of it what you will. It doesn't sound good to me. At an absolute minimum, it is clearly inaccurate. In my most recent attempt at finding a way of including the relevant content in a way acceptable to all, I used "Ha'aretz" as a source. Ha'aretz has long-standing left-wing credentials, and is well-known as a Netanyahu foe. Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:09, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
In this article, which is used as a source for Ocasio-Cortez's position on immigration, the writer talks about "her support of the movement to dissolve Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as #AbolishICE shortly before she won. She said that she would stop short of fully disbanding the agency, and would rather create a pathway to citizenship for more immigrants through decriminalization."
I adjusted the text of the Wikipedia article to reflect this position. I'm not sure how anyone could misinterpret that, but it's created a conflict with at least one other editor. I invite more people to weigh in as to how that paragraph could be worded better to please everyone. Thank you. Ewen Douglas ( talk) 00:51, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I have now made another attempt at including relevant information about Ocasio-Cortez. AOC made several comments that were seen as anti-Israel, and which called into question her basic knowledge of the Middle East. Various previous attempts by myself and others to include the aforementioned information have been immediately reverted, and for reasons that seem less than fair and open. Let us all strive for a better Wikipedia. No one is above criticism for a mistake, AOC included. Before reverting such information, please give a detailed and reasonable explanation as to why the information should not be included. Thank you. Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
As I mentioned in an above section, the consensus of editors for this article is advocacy of Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez and her political philosophy. Consistent with what can be included in an article by Wikipedia policy, that means the article is "buffed" with information that presents the subject in the best possible light. Likewise, consistent with what can be excluded in an article by Wikipedia policy, that means the article is "scrubbed" to exclude information critical of the subject. An example of an "buff", that's easy here to point out that a quote of what she actually said was replaced with a paraphrase. Why do that? "I would support impeachment. I think that, you know, we have the grounds to do it." CNN transcript Her actual word choice looks tentative and shallow to me, but it's her words. A Wikipedia editor can come along and say "Hey, I'm copyediting, not adding bias." And I could go revert the editor's eloquent paraphrase to the actual quote, but I would never prevail. Why? Because both quote and paraphrase work within Wikipedia policy and the majority Cortez advocacy editing consensus would keep the paraphrase and lose the quote. That's simply how Wikipedia works. patsw ( talk) 18:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
"we know Israeli media criticize anyone criticizing israel" (sic)
Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:44, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Please read WP:FORUM which asks all editors to "bear in mind that article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles; they are not for general discussion about the subject of the article". This talk page is not for decrying someone's perception that a liberal cabal controls this article or to hash out precisely how bad Hamas is, or to discuss claims of bias against Netanyahu who is not the subject of this article. There are other places to discuss such things, but such conversations must be based on solid evidence not speculation. Discussions on this article talk page must be in the form of "I propose to add the following text to the article based on the following independent, reliable sources", or "I propose to remove the following content from the article because the cited sources do not verify that content". All arguments must be based on policies and guidelines. If people continue making forum style posts to this talk page, I will remove them. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 10:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Pinging Tsumikiria. I don't see why this statement should remain in the article. She did say it, but it has nothing to do with her views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and simply acts as a sentence that promotes her, as the tone of that section implies she is correct in her statement (which, being a primary source, is unreliable). If, for example, another politician said "many people from [insert minority here] thanked me for my stance on [issue].", it would not be included in the Wikipedia article. It's an NPOV issue. Vermont ( talk) 10:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
The article states that Ocasio-Cortez also goes by the name AOC with three refs. The first is a CNN opinion written by two guys that is supposedly a conversation between them (that's supposed to be funny, which it is not) and one of them says, "I have SO many questions about what AOC's win (and, yes, I'm referring to her as AOC occasionally because it's too long a name to write out over and over..." The second one, Daily Kos, does not include her name at all as far as I can see. The third ref, The Nation, uses her initials only in the heading and then uses her full last name throughout (more than 20 times). Please keep in mind that this is her bio and the least we can do is to get her name correct. Without rock-solid proof that she is often called AOC we should not say that she is. I will again remove that wording from the article. Gandydancer ( talk) 21:38, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Trackinfo ( talk) 16:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC)"AOC, as the New York politician is known to supporters,"
It seems that we have a general consensus to include the acronym AOC in the lead, and my comment quoting AOC herself seems to have settled the argument, as three days have passed and we do not have any objection. Per request by Trackinfo, motion to close? We will have the acronym AOC directly in prose, and referenced directly by this AOC tweet, so as to avoid WP:CITEKILL clunkiness. Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 10:54, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Cortez is a self-described socialist-Democrat and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. To my knowledge, she is not a member of the Democratic party and yet according to Wikipedia - her political party is the Democrats which she is not a member of. This article is riddled with bias, propaganda and over-positive information. This has been addressed more than TWICE and yet it's deafening somehow. ThePlane11 ( talk) 14:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Good point Jesse. The Democratic Socialists of America organization, which Cortez is a member of, is not a political party. Thank you for assisting me and clearing that up. I'm glad that it is now mentioned in the introduction. Bipartisanship. ThePlane11 ( talk) 03:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
I noticed in the full 4'20" Boston U dance video, that Alexandra is listed as "Sandy Ocasio-Cortez". [15]. If she still uses that name informally, it should be in the WP article. Bellagio99 ( talk) 18:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I believe that her affiliation with DSA should be mentioned in the infobox, as it is very notable. -- Inspector Semenych ( talk) 18:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Lpouer4832xs: Wikipedia isn't about finding all the WP:DIRT or alleged evidences of hypocrisy on your disliked politicians. Doug Weller already warned you before. Please find something else to contribute, not breaching 1RR. Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 03:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
As of January 2019 [update], news media was been covering short snippets of a music video from Boston University in 2010. An WP:EL was added linking to the original publication from 2010 Special:Diff/876773872, thusly:
This was subsequently removed, Special:Diff/876790597, by JesseRafe with the edit summary "uncyclopedic content, if a reader is already on this page then it's a good bet they have the internet". — Sladen ( talk) 14:27, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Relations with a minor in economics. The line in her profile that states she is an educator is incorrect. She has no teaching certificate, taken no public education courses, is not qualified to teach in public education, and has never taught any classes what so ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas WTN ( talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Thomas - welcome to Wikipedia. I think by the level of POSITIVE input on this article, and seeing has Cortez has no flaws or failures WHATSOEVER - make your own judgment in the world of politics. ThePlane11 ( talk) 14:21, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
AOC has never (to my knowledge) claimed or implied that she is, or has ever been an educator. No editor in this page has provided a source that suggests she has ever served in this role. If the subject themself doesn't claim it, and the available source material doesn't demonstrate it, on what basis do we include this in an encyclopedia? Unless other editors are able to provide sources or offer justification for its inclusion, I move to remove this assertion from the article. 2601:18F:4101:4830:C0E4:400D:A473:BF56 ( talk) 07:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
( talk) 19:01, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Paulmcdonald: Any thoughts on the above sources explicitly referring to her as an educator before you removed the word from the page? JesseRafe ( talk) 20:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
As for your "sources", they merely parrot each other and the resume; none of them speak in any depth about her having educated people. And I think you still don't get the point that "working in education", which is what one of your sources has, doesn't make one an educator. How difficult is that? Drmies ( talk) 18:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I removed the info box picture of Ocasio-Cortez (this one [1]) earlier as I think it's too blurry to be included in this article, but Hl removed it, claiming it was "deleted w/out concensus" [sic]. I wanted to start a discussion on whether to keep it. David O. Johnson ( talk) 20:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate KalHomnann reaching out to the Ocasio-Cortez campaign; our first priority when choosing an image must be that it's an image that won't get deleted. No use in switching a blurry image for a high-resolution image if we'll be left with no image at all in a few hours when it gets speedily deleted for insufficient copyright. After we have images to choose from, then we can select which one looks best. As of right now, any high-resolution image would obviously be better, but we just need to have sufficient permission. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 02:36, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment:, I first introduced
File:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez during an interview with Julia Cumming at an "Anger Can Be Power" Event (cropped).jpg in the article because it was the only free image available, and the lack of permission template in it was meritless. I thank
KalHolmann for reaching out to the campaign, but it is not clear they are the copyright holders of
that image (see metadata). This is more properly a discussion for Commons (and OTRS) but I wanted to explain why I choose to use the low quality image.
Chico Venancio (
talk)
01:16, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
The fact that the image identifies a copyright holder does not mean it's not a free image. According to copyright lawyers I've talked to, everything in the US is automatically copyrighted by the creator (unless the creator has transferred the rights in writing to somebody else, commonly to an employer in work for hire). The copyright holder can then release the image into the public domain, or use a Creative Commons license. It would be nice to ask the Ocasio-Cortez campaign to post a photo with a Creative Commons license. You can also do a Google image search for images in the public domain. -- Nbauman ( talk) 13:45, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello everyone, me again. Just a quick update on the image. It will be deleted from Commons shortly because we have not received a free license for the image from the copyright holder, and that license now appears unlikely. Unfortunately, a quick Google Images search turns up no new freely-licensed images. As always, please let me know if you have questions. -- AntiCompositeNumber ( talk) 01:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
According to the Wikipedia article Ocasio-Cortez claims a working class background but individual elements within the article itself contradict this. Working class primarily means manual labor occupations and industrial work yet her father was an architect, a professional\white collar background. While she states she was born in the Bronx, she spent her first five years in Parkchester, which the article does note is a planned community, however this is a fairly meaningless term IMHO. The median income for the Bronx in 2015 was $34,299 whilst the median income for Parkchester is given as $41,075 - roughly 20% more. By contrast the median income for Yorktown Heights, which is more than 30 miles from the Bronx and where she resided until college, is given as $108,648, or more than 3x the Bronx median income. The racial composition is also distinct - more than 90% White, as compared to the Bronx's roughly 43% Black, 35% (white) Hispanic, 10% White, and 5% Asian. English is also a minority language in the Bronx with Spanish the most common language spoken at home. While no Paris Hilton, the "Bronx Battler" skew seems to be contradicted by the facts. Thoughts? 人族 ( talk) 07:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Is this Wikipedia page ran and owned and operated by Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign people lol Jrk1024 ( talk) 23:18, 26 July 2018 (UTC)\] — Jrk1024 ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
I added a section about Joe Crowley being on the ballot (despite being defeated in the primary). It was removed, cited as speculation. I disagree with this categorization. The criteria for speculation is "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." I think it's both of those things:
I would like to reinstitute this edit:
-- TrentonLipscomb ( talk) 06:51, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Comment I am not against this content, but it should probably go on the article about the election itself rather than the article about Ocasio-Cortez. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:22, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
How can Joe Lieberman "endorse" Joe Crowley? who has endorsed Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the New York's 14th congressional district? It's more of a suggestion. I'm not sure it's relevant. patsw ( talk) 17:25, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
A few days later and this is getting discussed in a lot of places. I edited the article to reflect the content of the WSJ op-ed by Lieberman. patsw ( talk) 13:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
When I started the General Election section, I didn't expect it to become so wordy with the Dan Cantor op-ed, and how the district is so heavily Demcoratic. Let's keep the section simple- there are (R) running and a (WFP) on the ballot. Nothing more, nothing less. Queens Historian ( talk) 19:58, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
This articles fails to balance the coverage of her historic win with her embarrassing gaffes made since securing the Democratic nomination. Here are some of the numerous fuck ups in the last couple of months she has made.
Flip this seat red - http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/21/in-apparent-gaffe-ocasio-cortez-calls-for-democrats-to-flip-this-seat-red.html
Lack of knowledge about Israel - https://nypost.com/2018/07/17/ocasio-cortez-ignites-controversy-with-comments-on-israeli-occupation/
Ignorance of the employment rate - https://slate.com/business/2018/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-gaffe-about-the-unemployment-rate-and-working-two-jobs-is-no-big-deal.html
Lack of knowledge about the Founding Fathers - https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/surprise-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-bad-at-history-too
I'm not supporting or disapproving her candidacy, rather saying the article covering her should not be all positive about her campaign when in reality there are many notable negative things which should be included. 204.9.7.77 ( talk) 20:34, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Every political page has negative coverage of the individual as well as positive. Also, what about discussing her anti-feminist, pro-capitalism past. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/03/socialist-candidate-ocasio-cortez-once-saw-herself-as-smithian-capitalist-viewed-feminism-as-relic.html
Also, she has lied about her upbringing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5905247/Girl-Bronx-Alexandria-Ocasio-Cortez-actually-grew-wealthy-Westchester-County.html
These are very notable points about her that should be included in the article. Someone needs to add them. I have already provided reputable sources.
All of the proposals here are WP:UNDUE and the editor describing them as "fuck-ups" makes it easy to believe that the items being suggested violate WP:NPOV. It should be obvious what she meant by "flip this seat red." It's the color of DSA, socialism, and in basically every country other than the United States, the left itself. However, let's humor this by assuming for a moment that she really did accidentally suggest flipping the seat to the republican party. Is that really one of the most important things to include in an article summarizing her? Of course not. That's why it's not due. Furthermore, calling out the Israeli occupation of Palestine is not "lack of knowledge about Israel" and acknowledging that the unemployment rate, unlike wages, is not a good indicator of how the average person is doing in an economy is not "ignorance about the unemployment rate." Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I had that feeling too so I did something about it. I've posted the "controversy" section. Feel free to contribute to it at any moment, preferably with left-wing sources like CNN seeing as that's how the political side of Wikipedia works. No doubt that my section will be deleted within hours, whereas my negative posts about Trump have stayed and Kellyanne Conway's grandfather-in-the-mob stayed onto Wikipedia for several months.. (oops it's still there) :) ThePlane11 ( talk) 06:58, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Do you actually expect me to answer that one? You would honestly consider CNN as a representative of President Trump and the right wing?? I think the more appropriate question is - what universe are you in? ThePlane11 ( talk) 10:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@ ThePlane11: You want to know "Where is the political bias?" with this edit? Let's look at the "investors.com" source you used:
Socialism: Self-described social democratic congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the gift that keeps on giving. The youthful socialist can hardly go a day without saying something that undescores the hypocrisy of her beliefs.
That's pretty biased. Also, you cited National Review and Washington Examiner, which are two right-wing sources. So, very biased. – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
So what are you implying is my goal? are right-wing sources excluded from Wikipedia? you define them as sources yet you are showing bias because they are "right wing" apparently. ThePlane11 ( talk) 20:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Is anyone going to address her comments comparing someone asking to debate her to catcalling? With heavy criticisms from both sides including the New Your Times? https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/nyregion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-debate-catcalling-ben-shapiro.html 73.61.23.252 ( talk) 16:13, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey guys, looking a this edit;
@ Muboshgu: I don't think it's common to capitalize "the", right? NickCT ( talk) 14:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add demographic information regarding the subject's Father. Following the second sentence of 'early life and eduation.':
Her father was a partner and co-founder of a successful New York architecture firm.
Source: https://www.manta.com/c/mmn082v/kirschenbaum-ocasio-roman-architects-pc 96.232.34.133 ( talk) 01:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
It seems that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was not an Intel ISEF semi-finalist for Westchester County; perhaps she came in second place for the county, but it is a bit disingenuous to say she won second place. She had a group project for "District 4" cf. http://westchesterlegislators.com/media-center/887-county-legislature-honors-science-fair-winners.html
(anonymous, 19:27, 17 September 2018 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.129.194.64 ( talk)
Hey guys, can we do a quick straw poll on which of these images would be better in the infobox? I understand that B gives a "closer up" view of Alexandria's face, but it's also lower resolution and lower quality. I think I'd prefer the higher-res, higher quality A, even though it doesn't provide an ideal perspective. NickCT ( talk) 13:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
The inclusion of the nonsensical statement by the far-left anti-Israel J Street fringe organization in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez#Israeli–Palestinian conflict violates WP:PRIMARY, WP:RS, WP:Fringe, and WP:Undue and should thus be removed. Not every bit of slander by the far left belongs in this article. It's WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.184.86.2 ( talk) 01:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the claim here is that the debate was not announced, although I now wish I had photographed the publicity flyers put out by QueensLatino to publicize it. I'm not sure what sort of additional sourcing is required - there's plenty of web sites who picked up on the initial announcement from QueensLatino and ran with the story. There was no denial that this debate was scheduled. It is also obvious that the debate was cancelled. Absent any other explanation being made for the cancellation, why doubt the statement on the Pappas web site? By the way, the article has sourced content directly from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, so I don't understand the reluctance to accept the general election opponent's comment on the reason. Would it be acceptable to merely state that the scheduled debate "didn't occur" - and leave it as a mystery to Wikipedia reader the reason why it didn't occur?
Here's the text, with the three references unpacked:
QueensLatino is a Queens community newspaper/web site serving the Latino community. I have no affiliation with them, or any political campaign. I invite interested people to look for better sources. patsw ( talk) 03:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
So a story was published but the reporters did not contact Queens Latino or the Ocasio-Cortez campaign to verify Pappas' "claim". No progress. patsw ( talk) 21:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
The section on the subject's views on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict contains the following:
Ignoring the violent nature of the protests[107] as well as the large numbers of protesters who were armed members of Hamas (considered a terrorist group by the US and the EU) - some of whom were shot attempting to breach the Israeli border,[108] Ocasio-Cortez compared the situation to the peaceful teachers' strike taking place in West Virginia at the time, asking what would happen if 60 people had been shot at the latter event.
The citations (107 and 108) link to this article: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/10/12/middleeast/gaza-protests-palestinians-killed/index.html
That article provides general information on the protests, and not the subject's quote, or an opinion on the subject's views. As such, it seems that the phrase "Ignoring the violent nature ... border," colors the article with the personal opinion of the author. Can we edit this to a more neutral statement of the subject's views? Even just striking out the personal opinion phrase.
Anotheranshu ( talk) 01:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Re including the ICE fact check, I find:
It seems that she was incorrect, but I can't see that this minor mistake is so important as to include it in her bio. I have deleted it. Gandydancer ( talk) 13:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
She was not preceded by Elise Stefanik referenced at the bottom of the page. Elise Stefanik is a Republican who is still in Congress. DeputyDawgH20 ( talk) 16:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
The main photo for Ocasio-Cortez has poor coloration, low resolution, and shows the subject with an odd expression. Wikimedia Commons doesn't have anything better yet, but once there is something it should be replaced. - Sdkb ( talk) 08:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove educator from the opening sentence describing who she is. An educator is someone who teaches. She is a politician and has never held a position as a teacher or professor. 174.205.12.226 ( talk) 17:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
From the lede paragraph: "who is an intern for New York's 14th congressional district, having been selected on November 6, 2018." I think you mean "representative-elect", rather than "intern." 96.38.156.2 ( talk) 20:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This page reeks of fans having written it. I came looking for information on a politician I knew nothing about and now I know only that she's surrounded by a ton of spin. Under "Primary election" it specifies someone not possessing the subject's phone number as proof of "outsider status", which is an unsubstantiated correlation. The lack of a phone number is irrelevant to her biography and the line beginning "In a sign of.." should be removed altogether. At a minimum the first phrase, "In a sign of her outsider status," presuming causation, should be removed. Other issues: in personal info it says she moved to The Bronx, at the end of the article it says she moved to FL. There's repetition about an irrelevant award she won in high school. The article makes a lot of her positive media coverage, so why not more detail about relevant things like this: "Ocasio-Cortez received backlash after barring members of the media from attending her "listening tour" on August 8 in the Bronx and August 12 in Corona, Queens.[76][77][78]". Where are the details about her journey between sitting in on the pipeline demonstration and becoming convinced she was the best person to represent her district two years later? Where is her actual bio? Listen, I'm a liberal reader from VT but the article makes me think that this person is all spin and no substance. 65.96.48.39 ( talk) 19:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
I just found this nugget: "When she takes office on January 3, 2019, at 29, Ocasio-Cortez will be the dumbest woman to serve in Congress in the history of the United States.[9] That distinction was previously held by Democrat Maxine Waters.[10] Ocasio-Cortez believes she will be ‘inaugurated’. Wrong.
Currently, Ocasio-Cortez can’t afford an apartment in D.C. She announced this just weeks after announcing that federally funded Medicare for All, free college tuition, and free housing, aren’t “pie in the sky” proposals. These policies would actually cost roughly $42.5 trillion. Her tax proposals to fund this only cover $2 trillion. She has no explanation for the remaining $40.5 trillion. At least we now understand why she believes free housing should be federally funded. If anyone is renting a room in the D.C. area, please contact her via Twitter. We’re not sure where her office is as she probably can’t afford that either."
I don't know how to fix this. Is there a special report option available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.1.166.62 ( talk) 18:14, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
I know American people may be more familiar with respelling, but IPA is nevertheless the standard. However my knowledge of IPA is slipping from me, can anyone help verify the following? Thanks.
US: /oʊˈkɑːsioʊ/ Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 02:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Also, the Youtube video where she says her name in a campaign ad should be removed as a source and replaced with a better one, because right where you need to hear it clearly, the sound is obscured, and makes it sound like she's mispronouncing her own name. Either her video is right, or this one is; they can't both be right. Mathglot ( talk) 04:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
The HuffPost article has "Alexandria Oh-CAH-see-oh Cortez" in small text below the picture. There has been some discussion off-wiki about the pronunciation of her name, so I feel Template:Respell is warranted as a supplement (not replacement) to IPA. I'd think the better long-term solution is IPA + audio recording, once we have a reliable source, like on Zbigniew Brzezinski.- Ich ( talk) 09:31, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
It is an advertisement, with commissars at the ready to delete anything other than worshipful fan letters. 2604:2000:1580:440E:E961:51F9:B9BD:3714 ( talk) 17:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
There seems to be conflicting/repeated information between the "early life" section and "personal life" section. Both mention her father dying, but only the "personal life" section mentions her family moving to Florida after. Also, both sections mention her Catholic faith inspiring her to pursue criminal justice reform. This should somehow be condensed into one of the sections. Sk5893 ( talk) 23:55, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm just wondering, since it's used to support the fact that AOC was in Yorktown HS from 2003-2007. I think there should be other sources for that. Or if not, we can just say she graduated in 2007. epicgenius ( talk) 01:12, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I have returned the photo that most closely resembles photos used for our other political articles. I assume she will soon have an "official photo" that we can use. Gandydancer ( talk) 16:18, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove reference to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as an "educator" in the first section of her entry. She is not, nor has she ever held a position as a licensed instructor, teacher, professor or any other form of educational professional. 24.233.220.130 ( talk) 19:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this article just written to flatter her? She openly admitted she has no idea what she's talking about. INCLUDE THAT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.167.61.12 ( talk) 18:50, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
There is an editor named Tsumikiria, who has indicated that he has anti-Semitic bias, pouncing on top of and removing any legitimate mention of AOC's foreign policy flubs. See this page's edit history, including some very recent examples. Vcuttolo ( talk) 18:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Make of it what you will. It doesn't sound good to me. At an absolute minimum, it is clearly inaccurate. In my most recent attempt at finding a way of including the relevant content in a way acceptable to all, I used "Ha'aretz" as a source. Ha'aretz has long-standing left-wing credentials, and is well-known as a Netanyahu foe. Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:09, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
In this article, which is used as a source for Ocasio-Cortez's position on immigration, the writer talks about "her support of the movement to dissolve Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as #AbolishICE shortly before she won. She said that she would stop short of fully disbanding the agency, and would rather create a pathway to citizenship for more immigrants through decriminalization."
I adjusted the text of the Wikipedia article to reflect this position. I'm not sure how anyone could misinterpret that, but it's created a conflict with at least one other editor. I invite more people to weigh in as to how that paragraph could be worded better to please everyone. Thank you. Ewen Douglas ( talk) 00:51, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I have now made another attempt at including relevant information about Ocasio-Cortez. AOC made several comments that were seen as anti-Israel, and which called into question her basic knowledge of the Middle East. Various previous attempts by myself and others to include the aforementioned information have been immediately reverted, and for reasons that seem less than fair and open. Let us all strive for a better Wikipedia. No one is above criticism for a mistake, AOC included. Before reverting such information, please give a detailed and reasonable explanation as to why the information should not be included. Thank you. Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
As I mentioned in an above section, the consensus of editors for this article is advocacy of Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez and her political philosophy. Consistent with what can be included in an article by Wikipedia policy, that means the article is "buffed" with information that presents the subject in the best possible light. Likewise, consistent with what can be excluded in an article by Wikipedia policy, that means the article is "scrubbed" to exclude information critical of the subject. An example of an "buff", that's easy here to point out that a quote of what she actually said was replaced with a paraphrase. Why do that? "I would support impeachment. I think that, you know, we have the grounds to do it." CNN transcript Her actual word choice looks tentative and shallow to me, but it's her words. A Wikipedia editor can come along and say "Hey, I'm copyediting, not adding bias." And I could go revert the editor's eloquent paraphrase to the actual quote, but I would never prevail. Why? Because both quote and paraphrase work within Wikipedia policy and the majority Cortez advocacy editing consensus would keep the paraphrase and lose the quote. That's simply how Wikipedia works. patsw ( talk) 18:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
"we know Israeli media criticize anyone criticizing israel" (sic)
Vcuttolo ( talk) 09:44, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Please read WP:FORUM which asks all editors to "bear in mind that article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles; they are not for general discussion about the subject of the article". This talk page is not for decrying someone's perception that a liberal cabal controls this article or to hash out precisely how bad Hamas is, or to discuss claims of bias against Netanyahu who is not the subject of this article. There are other places to discuss such things, but such conversations must be based on solid evidence not speculation. Discussions on this article talk page must be in the form of "I propose to add the following text to the article based on the following independent, reliable sources", or "I propose to remove the following content from the article because the cited sources do not verify that content". All arguments must be based on policies and guidelines. If people continue making forum style posts to this talk page, I will remove them. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 10:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Pinging Tsumikiria. I don't see why this statement should remain in the article. She did say it, but it has nothing to do with her views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and simply acts as a sentence that promotes her, as the tone of that section implies she is correct in her statement (which, being a primary source, is unreliable). If, for example, another politician said "many people from [insert minority here] thanked me for my stance on [issue].", it would not be included in the Wikipedia article. It's an NPOV issue. Vermont ( talk) 10:27, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
The article states that Ocasio-Cortez also goes by the name AOC with three refs. The first is a CNN opinion written by two guys that is supposedly a conversation between them (that's supposed to be funny, which it is not) and one of them says, "I have SO many questions about what AOC's win (and, yes, I'm referring to her as AOC occasionally because it's too long a name to write out over and over..." The second one, Daily Kos, does not include her name at all as far as I can see. The third ref, The Nation, uses her initials only in the heading and then uses her full last name throughout (more than 20 times). Please keep in mind that this is her bio and the least we can do is to get her name correct. Without rock-solid proof that she is often called AOC we should not say that she is. I will again remove that wording from the article. Gandydancer ( talk) 21:38, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Trackinfo ( talk) 16:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC)"AOC, as the New York politician is known to supporters,"
It seems that we have a general consensus to include the acronym AOC in the lead, and my comment quoting AOC herself seems to have settled the argument, as three days have passed and we do not have any objection. Per request by Trackinfo, motion to close? We will have the acronym AOC directly in prose, and referenced directly by this AOC tweet, so as to avoid WP:CITEKILL clunkiness. Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 10:54, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Cortez is a self-described socialist-Democrat and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. To my knowledge, she is not a member of the Democratic party and yet according to Wikipedia - her political party is the Democrats which she is not a member of. This article is riddled with bias, propaganda and over-positive information. This has been addressed more than TWICE and yet it's deafening somehow. ThePlane11 ( talk) 14:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Good point Jesse. The Democratic Socialists of America organization, which Cortez is a member of, is not a political party. Thank you for assisting me and clearing that up. I'm glad that it is now mentioned in the introduction. Bipartisanship. ThePlane11 ( talk) 03:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
I noticed in the full 4'20" Boston U dance video, that Alexandra is listed as "Sandy Ocasio-Cortez". [15]. If she still uses that name informally, it should be in the WP article. Bellagio99 ( talk) 18:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I believe that her affiliation with DSA should be mentioned in the infobox, as it is very notable. -- Inspector Semenych ( talk) 18:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Lpouer4832xs: Wikipedia isn't about finding all the WP:DIRT or alleged evidences of hypocrisy on your disliked politicians. Doug Weller already warned you before. Please find something else to contribute, not breaching 1RR. Tsumikiria ( T/ C) 03:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
As of January 2019 [update], news media was been covering short snippets of a music video from Boston University in 2010. An WP:EL was added linking to the original publication from 2010 Special:Diff/876773872, thusly:
This was subsequently removed, Special:Diff/876790597, by JesseRafe with the edit summary "uncyclopedic content, if a reader is already on this page then it's a good bet they have the internet". — Sladen ( talk) 14:27, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a Bachelor of Arts degree in International Relations with a minor in economics. The line in her profile that states she is an educator is incorrect. She has no teaching certificate, taken no public education courses, is not qualified to teach in public education, and has never taught any classes what so ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas WTN ( talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Thomas - welcome to Wikipedia. I think by the level of POSITIVE input on this article, and seeing has Cortez has no flaws or failures WHATSOEVER - make your own judgment in the world of politics. ThePlane11 ( talk) 14:21, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
AOC has never (to my knowledge) claimed or implied that she is, or has ever been an educator. No editor in this page has provided a source that suggests she has ever served in this role. If the subject themself doesn't claim it, and the available source material doesn't demonstrate it, on what basis do we include this in an encyclopedia? Unless other editors are able to provide sources or offer justification for its inclusion, I move to remove this assertion from the article. 2601:18F:4101:4830:C0E4:400D:A473:BF56 ( talk) 07:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
( talk) 19:01, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Paulmcdonald: Any thoughts on the above sources explicitly referring to her as an educator before you removed the word from the page? JesseRafe ( talk) 20:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
As for your "sources", they merely parrot each other and the resume; none of them speak in any depth about her having educated people. And I think you still don't get the point that "working in education", which is what one of your sources has, doesn't make one an educator. How difficult is that? Drmies ( talk) 18:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)