This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Karen Handel 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 |
![]() | Karen Handel received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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 page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It appears the only refrence for this GED claim is actually this entry, which is now being picked up nationally. I have removed it pending references in either direction. [[User:Ed Wood's Wig|]] ( talk) 17:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
This is at peer review for a dispute resolution (the GED incident noted above). Is there any interest in a real peer review (PR is not for dispute resolution). If a review is wanted, please say so on the peer review (link above) in the next 24 hours. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Having a topic dealing with Wiki controversies strikes me as very meta and not particularly relevant to the person. Does a conversation about who edited what on whose wiki page really belong in a wiki entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.94.195.53 ( talk) 18:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
This article is tagged arguing there is a neutrality issue. Can people identify the exact problems they are seeing? It's not well written, but I'm not seeing any particular bias. Hobit ( talk) 19:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I think there was a newscast just now that stated she conceded to Deal. 173.69.164.21 ( talk) 15:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Two unregistered editors just changed the date of birth. In tracing back to the source, I realized that nothing in the article supports her date of birth. I've commented the date out temporarily in the three places it appears in the article. Does anybody have a source for it? — C.Fred ( talk) 14:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
It looks like there is an ongoing attempt to vandalise in the name of political soapboxing. More protection (and some IP banning) needed? 99.67.187.88 ( talk) 15:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Karen Handel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://times-georgian.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Handel-+candidate+for+Ga-+gov-+makes+early+campaign+stop+in+Carrollton+&id=3285499When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
For most of this article's history, the intro sentence has used the factually correct but awkward language 'businesswoman and politician in Georgia'. More recently it has been changed to 'from Georgia', which to the vast majority of readers would suggest she's a Georgia native, which she is not. Either extra language is needed to clarify this point, or a concise form of words that emphasises her long association with Georgia without suggesting she is a native should be adopted. Looking at other entries, it seems that 'from' usually refers to place of birth, sometimes childhood, but that where the subject lives somewhere other than their place of birth/upbringing, then editors have usually expanded references to origins in the intro to clarify this point (see almost any of the hundreds of entries for successful entertainment, business and political figures now resident of major east and west coast cities).
As a curious UK reader interested in the Special Election but with no axe to grind in terms of US congressional politics - which I don't follow/have views on - I found the contradiction between the intro as it now reads ('from Georgia') and the subsequent content confusing (the Early Life section provides apparently undisputed information about places of birth, upbringing and education, none of which are in Georgia).
I made a logged-out edit (I've made hundreds of small edits and several extensive edits to Wikipedia over the last 20 years, but never created an account) which has been swiftly reverted on the grounds that it's partisan (whereas I thought the original ambiguity might have partisan motivations, given that supporters of candidates standing for office usually wish them to be perceived as being as strongly associated with the constituency in which they are standing as is possible).
I'm going to revert the intro to the language that I think best reflects the subject's relationship to Georgia - long time resident, but not a native - as I think this is more accurate than 'from Georgia' and have recorded my logic for my change here. I've also created a Wikipedia account for the first time so that this change isn't made anonymously. TheOaks ( talk) 07:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
You don't automatically become a member of the House the second your election is called. Where is this idea coming from, that she became a member of the House on the day of her election? Please see this article from the major Atlanta paper [1] and the House website [2]. She is not a rep yet. The very idea seems rather... European... that she became a rep on June 20th, the day of her election. Amazed that this misinformation is in the article! Moncrief ( talk) 20:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Mid-term vacancies are seated the date of the election. JocularJellyfish ( talk) 22:58, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Given there's an ongoing lawsuit in regards to the voting integrity of the Georgia special election, which (to my knowledge) is still ongoing, is it worth noting within her relevant section for the election itself? There were some.. "irregularities" immediately following the lawsuit, such as destruction of servers etc that would likely be noteworthy and are known in relation to the election, though there has been no full resolution to the case(s) yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.95.28 ( talk) 11:09, 4 April 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) 15:40, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Sam.h.brenner is asking that this picture be removed from the article. What is the process for this? TIA Malerooster ( talk) 00:13, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Karen Handel 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 |
![]() | Karen Handel received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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 page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It appears the only refrence for this GED claim is actually this entry, which is now being picked up nationally. I have removed it pending references in either direction. [[User:Ed Wood's Wig|]] ( talk) 17:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
This is at peer review for a dispute resolution (the GED incident noted above). Is there any interest in a real peer review (PR is not for dispute resolution). If a review is wanted, please say so on the peer review (link above) in the next 24 hours. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Having a topic dealing with Wiki controversies strikes me as very meta and not particularly relevant to the person. Does a conversation about who edited what on whose wiki page really belong in a wiki entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.94.195.53 ( talk) 18:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
This article is tagged arguing there is a neutrality issue. Can people identify the exact problems they are seeing? It's not well written, but I'm not seeing any particular bias. Hobit ( talk) 19:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I think there was a newscast just now that stated she conceded to Deal. 173.69.164.21 ( talk) 15:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Two unregistered editors just changed the date of birth. In tracing back to the source, I realized that nothing in the article supports her date of birth. I've commented the date out temporarily in the three places it appears in the article. Does anybody have a source for it? — C.Fred ( talk) 14:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
It looks like there is an ongoing attempt to vandalise in the name of political soapboxing. More protection (and some IP banning) needed? 99.67.187.88 ( talk) 15:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Karen Handel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://times-georgian.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Handel-+candidate+for+Ga-+gov-+makes+early+campaign+stop+in+Carrollton+&id=3285499When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
For most of this article's history, the intro sentence has used the factually correct but awkward language 'businesswoman and politician in Georgia'. More recently it has been changed to 'from Georgia', which to the vast majority of readers would suggest she's a Georgia native, which she is not. Either extra language is needed to clarify this point, or a concise form of words that emphasises her long association with Georgia without suggesting she is a native should be adopted. Looking at other entries, it seems that 'from' usually refers to place of birth, sometimes childhood, but that where the subject lives somewhere other than their place of birth/upbringing, then editors have usually expanded references to origins in the intro to clarify this point (see almost any of the hundreds of entries for successful entertainment, business and political figures now resident of major east and west coast cities).
As a curious UK reader interested in the Special Election but with no axe to grind in terms of US congressional politics - which I don't follow/have views on - I found the contradiction between the intro as it now reads ('from Georgia') and the subsequent content confusing (the Early Life section provides apparently undisputed information about places of birth, upbringing and education, none of which are in Georgia).
I made a logged-out edit (I've made hundreds of small edits and several extensive edits to Wikipedia over the last 20 years, but never created an account) which has been swiftly reverted on the grounds that it's partisan (whereas I thought the original ambiguity might have partisan motivations, given that supporters of candidates standing for office usually wish them to be perceived as being as strongly associated with the constituency in which they are standing as is possible).
I'm going to revert the intro to the language that I think best reflects the subject's relationship to Georgia - long time resident, but not a native - as I think this is more accurate than 'from Georgia' and have recorded my logic for my change here. I've also created a Wikipedia account for the first time so that this change isn't made anonymously. TheOaks ( talk) 07:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
You don't automatically become a member of the House the second your election is called. Where is this idea coming from, that she became a member of the House on the day of her election? Please see this article from the major Atlanta paper [1] and the House website [2]. She is not a rep yet. The very idea seems rather... European... that she became a rep on June 20th, the day of her election. Amazed that this misinformation is in the article! Moncrief ( talk) 20:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Mid-term vacancies are seated the date of the election. JocularJellyfish ( talk) 22:58, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Given there's an ongoing lawsuit in regards to the voting integrity of the Georgia special election, which (to my knowledge) is still ongoing, is it worth noting within her relevant section for the election itself? There were some.. "irregularities" immediately following the lawsuit, such as destruction of servers etc that would likely be noteworthy and are known in relation to the election, though there has been no full resolution to the case(s) yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.152.95.28 ( talk) 11:09, 4 April 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) 15:40, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
User:Sam.h.brenner is asking that this picture be removed from the article. What is the process for this? TIA Malerooster ( talk) 00:13, 4 December 2022 (UTC)