![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
{{ WikiProject Politics}} Skinnytony1 ( talk) 09:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
I've place this removed text here if someone can help with salvaging it, see change here
FACT has been described as using "the legal system as a political weapon" [1] and characterized, by a GOP operative, as a "one of the hackier things I ever saw...If you wanted to be treated seriously you have to do serious work. The whole thing just became a chop shop of fake ethics complaints.". [2] Matthew Whitaker Ran ‘a Chop Shop of Fake Ethics Complaints’|last=Freedlander|first=David|date=2018-11-09|work=New York Magazine - Intelligencer|access-date=2018-11-14|language=en}}</ref>
How about this R2:
Skinnytony1 ( talk) 23:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
The infobox says 501(c)(4) but the website for the organization says - "The Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust (FACT) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization." [3] -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Can we keep the list of complaints? Wikieditor19920 changed here it's half the story of FACT and its not synthesised any where else. How is this list different from episodes of a TV show or lists of awards for Paralympians or notable alumni or lists of communication to the International Criminal Court other lists or award lists. There was something like 58 complaints to democratic organisations and individuals on the list, all sourced, now it states there was 46 complaints to democratic organisations and individuals. So now it's been summarised to be wrong information. Also, there is potential to expand notable complaints showing how they developed. Once again as previously stated I would want to see this on an encyclopaedia. If you want I can format it into a table like this. There is precedent for lists...Where's the WP:NEGOTIATION? Skinnytony1 ( talk) 08:34, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
You are correct that tables and long lists exist elsewhere on Wikipedia. However, that does not justify their use in every instance, and it certainly doesn’t seem appropriate here. There is a distinction between a list of episodes of a famous T.V. show, to use an example you mentioned, and a list of “complaints” by a little-known non-profit that mostly went nowhere. The subtext of including that absurd list seemed to be that the organization almost exclusively focuses on Democratic people/organizations. That is noteworthy for a self-described non-partisan organization (at least I think that’s what they call themselves), but that point can just as easily be stated directly. The full list is WP:TMI. And if my edit got the numbers wrong, I was just referring to the source. I do see that that may have only been within a certain time frame, so feel free to fix that if the number is actually wrong. However, the list is ridiculous, IMO. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
{{ WikiProject Politics}} Skinnytony1 ( talk) 09:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
I've place this removed text here if someone can help with salvaging it, see change here
FACT has been described as using "the legal system as a political weapon" [1] and characterized, by a GOP operative, as a "one of the hackier things I ever saw...If you wanted to be treated seriously you have to do serious work. The whole thing just became a chop shop of fake ethics complaints.". [2] Matthew Whitaker Ran ‘a Chop Shop of Fake Ethics Complaints’|last=Freedlander|first=David|date=2018-11-09|work=New York Magazine - Intelligencer|access-date=2018-11-14|language=en}}</ref>
How about this R2:
Skinnytony1 ( talk) 23:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
The infobox says 501(c)(4) but the website for the organization says - "The Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust (FACT) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization." [3] -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Can we keep the list of complaints? Wikieditor19920 changed here it's half the story of FACT and its not synthesised any where else. How is this list different from episodes of a TV show or lists of awards for Paralympians or notable alumni or lists of communication to the International Criminal Court other lists or award lists. There was something like 58 complaints to democratic organisations and individuals on the list, all sourced, now it states there was 46 complaints to democratic organisations and individuals. So now it's been summarised to be wrong information. Also, there is potential to expand notable complaints showing how they developed. Once again as previously stated I would want to see this on an encyclopaedia. If you want I can format it into a table like this. There is precedent for lists...Where's the WP:NEGOTIATION? Skinnytony1 ( talk) 08:34, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
You are correct that tables and long lists exist elsewhere on Wikipedia. However, that does not justify their use in every instance, and it certainly doesn’t seem appropriate here. There is a distinction between a list of episodes of a famous T.V. show, to use an example you mentioned, and a list of “complaints” by a little-known non-profit that mostly went nowhere. The subtext of including that absurd list seemed to be that the organization almost exclusively focuses on Democratic people/organizations. That is noteworthy for a self-described non-partisan organization (at least I think that’s what they call themselves), but that point can just as easily be stated directly. The full list is WP:TMI. And if my edit got the numbers wrong, I was just referring to the source. I do see that that may have only been within a certain time frame, so feel free to fix that if the number is actually wrong. However, the list is ridiculous, IMO. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)