![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I have again placed Constance Gadell-Newton's picture at the top of the page. My name is Joe DeMare and I am Political Director of the Ohio Green Party. Placing the Republican, Democrat, and Libertarian candidates at the top of the entry while relegating the Green to a tiny picture at the bottom shows clear bias in favor of the other three candidates. The argument that the Libertarian "deserves" to be pictured because in one out of 20 polls he met the arbitrary 5% threshold for inclusion ignores the fact that in every poll, the Green and Libertarian numbers have been within the margin of error of each other and within the margin of error of obtaining the arbitrary and unfair 5% non-rule.
However, there is another reason both the Libertarian and Green candidates must be included. That is their importance in the outcome of this election. The Republican and Democrat candidates are in a dead heat. Their poll numbers have consistently been within the margin of error of each other. Any factor that could tip the election one way or the other, such as the candidacy of the Green or Libertarian, is important enough to include in any unbiased, neutral description of this race. To do otherwise would amount to censorship. If November 7 comes and it turns out that the Candidacy of the Libertarian or Green DID make the difference in the outcome, Wikipedia readers would have been left ignorant because of biased presentation of information. Burying pictures and information at the bottom of an article indicates that those pictured or discussed are less important than the ones at the top. In this race, that indication is false. Each of the four candidates are playing a vital role in this election, so each must be represented in the presentations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe DeMare ( talk • contribs) 02:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Joe DeMare ( talk) 02:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
in the republican section is a listing for the "We the People Convention". Their website says "Akron, OH – Tom Zawistowski, President of the We the People Convention, today announced the result of the first Conservative Coalition Tracking Poll which measures the current position of the four announced Republican Governor candidates among TEA Party and Liberty Group Activist, Social Conservatives, Gun Owners, Fiscal Conservatives, and Trump Democrats who formed the coalition that carried Ohio for Donald Trump in last year’s Presidential Election. The We the People Convention held a “Meet the Republican Governor Candidates” event outside of Columbus on June 24th where all four candidates were given the opportunity to address nearly 300 top activist in the state for an hour each."
The results listed are for those 300 activists who showed up at this meeting. Is this really a "Poll"? Roseohioresident ( talk) 21:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thanks for the heads up @roseohioresident Dael4 ( talk) 18:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Dael4 ( talk) 18:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
What is the policy for presenting photos of candidates? Ohio Board of Elections has certified three candidates for the general election, but only two have photos shown. 2607:FCC8:9F44:5900:149B:B7AF:9DD3:40DB ( talk) 01:43, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
There appears to be a user who is unhappy with Gadell-Newton's photo.
First 47.151.23.7 reverted the photo without explanation. With apparent WP:CONSENSUS on the talk page I restored the photo stating that Gadell-Newton is a ballot candidate. [1] User:Kart2401real again removed the photo, stating "Ohio's Green Party did not get at least 5% in last election." These appear to be the same user, or users working together on a project? They have an almost overwhelming edit history overlap.
As I understand it, the bar for featuring a candidate's photo on Wikipedia is low. As reference, United States presidential election, 2020 features the photos of a number of speculative candidates, years ahead of the election, many of whom are merely "declared". A recent RfC requesting more strict rules or cleanup received 11 responses, with 8 opposed. Most of the candidates listed in that page did not get 5% of the vote. That is not the only example, just the most recent one I have come across.
Are there any other reasons this photo should not be featured?
@ Kart2401real: Requesting comment.
-- Elephanthunter ( talk) 02:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
I do not believe we are in an era where legitimate candidates have to fight to be featured on wikipedia page about their general election info. This is the democratic process established by the United States, If anything Wikipedia should hold a higher standard. There are other actors here.
@ Mélencron: Requesting comment. @ Richelieu94: Requesting comment. @ Nevermore27: Requesting comment.
Dael4 (
talk)
03:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
References
What the editors of Wikipedia have to ask themselves is, "What is the difference between setting arbitrary thresholds which are too high for minor parties to pass and censorship?" I submit there is no difference. This is a simple case of political repression. Many polls show that most Americans want to have an alternative to the two Party system. Greens and other minor Parties have done the hard work of creating those Parties, only to be denied access to the public commons time and time again. People turn to information sources like Wikipedia, searching for unbiased information. Putting large pictures of the candidates from two Parties at the top of the page, while relegating the Green Party candidate to a tiny picture near the bottom of the entry shows clear bias, a clear preference of the editors for two Parties over a third. Full disclosure, I am the Political Director for the Ohio Green Party, but these comments apply to all minor party exclusions. Joe DeMare ( talk) 03:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Yea well Don't delete because you can help add Travis Irvine Sir if you really want to do something constructive.
@ Nevermore27: Requesting comment. put them in Dael4 ( talk) 16:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I could find nothing on the Ohio SOS website for the general election ballots, but I did find a county example which did not show the Libertarian candidate: http://vote.franklincountyohio.gov/public/documents/PDF/5D964242-E16D-73CB-B828371456C4CC70.pdf 2600:1008:B162:7796:A8CD:CBB1:8AAB:C1D5 ( talk) 15:34, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add these links directly under External links:
![]() | This
edit request to
Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is a democratically elected candidate in Ohio under the rules of the state. There is no reason why Constance Gadell-Newton's candidacy should be removed from this page. I have been defending american democratic values on this page. And have been under attack every since placing her there. Dael4 ( talk) 02:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Consensus#Pitfalls_and_errors "Editors who ignore talk page discussions yet continue to edit in or revert disputed material, or who stonewall discussions, may be guilty of disruptive editing and incur sanctions. Consensus cannot always be assumed simply because editors stop responding to talk page discussions in which they have already participated." ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Consensus#Pitfalls_and_errors ) Dael4 ( talk) 02:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
For the sake of the democratic process here in Ohio and throughout the United States against existing major party anarchy, hopefully setting a new standard for wikipedia, we request that Constance Gadell-Newton's Photo and info box data be put back in place and also Ohio Libertarian Gov. candidate, Travis Irvine be placed/inserted there. Both are legitimate candidates in the state of Ohio. Dael4 ( talk) 02:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
As I have said before importance is proportional to the venue. There are candidates. Present them. Exclusion is not an option. Importance is mutually exclusive in the not having them there screams unequal treatment and prejudice as to effective politicking. Polls say many people value this parties principals. Dael4 ( talk) 05:21, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Back in May I posted on my talk page, "Editing the Ohio gubernatorial elections 2018 and considering the https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1 RFC 1 third parties, Wikipedia has become very undemocratic. Basing inclusion on media coverage and financial backing and not on actual election results. Third party should be allowed regardless because they are on the ballot here. Make no mistake Wikipedia is used basically as a promotional tool by the Democrats and the Republicans and if they cannot include third parties then it proves the lack of democratic action therein Dael4 ( talk) 23:37, 14 May 2018 (UTC) Dael4 ( talk) 05:45, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Bb is an unreliable source with no longstanding reputation for responsible editorial oversight or fact checking. (See also this RfC.) Bb should not be used as a source for anything other than the opinion of Bb. GMG talk 12:49, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
On 15 October 2018, User:Mélencron removed the Green Party and its candidates from the Infobox, explaining in his edit summary, "only Irvine is polling at least 5%." I have restored that content pending consensus, and request clarification of two distinct issues raised by Mélencron.
I urge Mélencron to let stand the Infobox including the Green Party and its nominees until consensus forms for their removal on solid grounds of specific Wikipedia policy. KalHolmann ( talk) 03:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Is the Green Party candidate even being polled? The polling table doesn't include her. Why should we include a candidate that isn't being polled in the infobox? I don't know that we should include the Libertarian candidate based on his low polling numbers. – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Since 07:14, 17 October 2018 User:Nevermore27 has made four identical reversions in the article space to exclude Green Party nominees from the Infobox. At this talk page, he has declared "there is no rational basis to include" Green Party gubernatorial nominee Constance Gadell-Newton. It is pertinent, I believe, to note that on his user page Nevermore27 has since 6 December 2017 actively supported Gadell-Newton's opponent, Democratic Party gubernatorial nominee Richard Cordray. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, I urge Nevermore27 to recuse himself from further edits to Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018. KalHolmann ( talk) 04:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I'm the campaign manager for the Irvine campaign. The photo we would like to have used is available in multiple places. I cannot upload because I don't have 10 edits. I usually just edit things anonymously even though I've had this account for eons. In any case, if someone would like to have a free-to-use (no license restriction) picture of Travis for the Wikipedia page, please hit me up at https://irvineforohio.com/contact and I'll respond with that picture. Thank you.
I have placed {Connected contributor} at the top of this page in accordance with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, which allows another editor to add that template when the connected contributor does not. At 22:01, 17 October 2018, User:Bnewmark42 revised the article space. Forty-one minutes later, in an unsigned comment on this talk page, he stated, "I'm the campaign manager for the Irvine campaign." Forty minutes thereafter, still without having formally disclosed his COI, he again revised the article space. KalHolmann ( talk) 00:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Why does that map have incorrect country lines? Take a look at Athens for example in this accurate map. - Nusent 18:42, 12 April 2019 (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) 01:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I have again placed Constance Gadell-Newton's picture at the top of the page. My name is Joe DeMare and I am Political Director of the Ohio Green Party. Placing the Republican, Democrat, and Libertarian candidates at the top of the entry while relegating the Green to a tiny picture at the bottom shows clear bias in favor of the other three candidates. The argument that the Libertarian "deserves" to be pictured because in one out of 20 polls he met the arbitrary 5% threshold for inclusion ignores the fact that in every poll, the Green and Libertarian numbers have been within the margin of error of each other and within the margin of error of obtaining the arbitrary and unfair 5% non-rule.
However, there is another reason both the Libertarian and Green candidates must be included. That is their importance in the outcome of this election. The Republican and Democrat candidates are in a dead heat. Their poll numbers have consistently been within the margin of error of each other. Any factor that could tip the election one way or the other, such as the candidacy of the Green or Libertarian, is important enough to include in any unbiased, neutral description of this race. To do otherwise would amount to censorship. If November 7 comes and it turns out that the Candidacy of the Libertarian or Green DID make the difference in the outcome, Wikipedia readers would have been left ignorant because of biased presentation of information. Burying pictures and information at the bottom of an article indicates that those pictured or discussed are less important than the ones at the top. In this race, that indication is false. Each of the four candidates are playing a vital role in this election, so each must be represented in the presentations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe DeMare ( talk • contribs) 02:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Joe DeMare ( talk) 02:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
in the republican section is a listing for the "We the People Convention". Their website says "Akron, OH – Tom Zawistowski, President of the We the People Convention, today announced the result of the first Conservative Coalition Tracking Poll which measures the current position of the four announced Republican Governor candidates among TEA Party and Liberty Group Activist, Social Conservatives, Gun Owners, Fiscal Conservatives, and Trump Democrats who formed the coalition that carried Ohio for Donald Trump in last year’s Presidential Election. The We the People Convention held a “Meet the Republican Governor Candidates” event outside of Columbus on June 24th where all four candidates were given the opportunity to address nearly 300 top activist in the state for an hour each."
The results listed are for those 300 activists who showed up at this meeting. Is this really a "Poll"? Roseohioresident ( talk) 21:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thanks for the heads up @roseohioresident Dael4 ( talk) 18:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Dael4 ( talk) 18:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
What is the policy for presenting photos of candidates? Ohio Board of Elections has certified three candidates for the general election, but only two have photos shown. 2607:FCC8:9F44:5900:149B:B7AF:9DD3:40DB ( talk) 01:43, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
There appears to be a user who is unhappy with Gadell-Newton's photo.
First 47.151.23.7 reverted the photo without explanation. With apparent WP:CONSENSUS on the talk page I restored the photo stating that Gadell-Newton is a ballot candidate. [1] User:Kart2401real again removed the photo, stating "Ohio's Green Party did not get at least 5% in last election." These appear to be the same user, or users working together on a project? They have an almost overwhelming edit history overlap.
As I understand it, the bar for featuring a candidate's photo on Wikipedia is low. As reference, United States presidential election, 2020 features the photos of a number of speculative candidates, years ahead of the election, many of whom are merely "declared". A recent RfC requesting more strict rules or cleanup received 11 responses, with 8 opposed. Most of the candidates listed in that page did not get 5% of the vote. That is not the only example, just the most recent one I have come across.
Are there any other reasons this photo should not be featured?
@ Kart2401real: Requesting comment.
-- Elephanthunter ( talk) 02:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
I do not believe we are in an era where legitimate candidates have to fight to be featured on wikipedia page about their general election info. This is the democratic process established by the United States, If anything Wikipedia should hold a higher standard. There are other actors here.
@ Mélencron: Requesting comment. @ Richelieu94: Requesting comment. @ Nevermore27: Requesting comment.
Dael4 (
talk)
03:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
References
What the editors of Wikipedia have to ask themselves is, "What is the difference between setting arbitrary thresholds which are too high for minor parties to pass and censorship?" I submit there is no difference. This is a simple case of political repression. Many polls show that most Americans want to have an alternative to the two Party system. Greens and other minor Parties have done the hard work of creating those Parties, only to be denied access to the public commons time and time again. People turn to information sources like Wikipedia, searching for unbiased information. Putting large pictures of the candidates from two Parties at the top of the page, while relegating the Green Party candidate to a tiny picture near the bottom of the entry shows clear bias, a clear preference of the editors for two Parties over a third. Full disclosure, I am the Political Director for the Ohio Green Party, but these comments apply to all minor party exclusions. Joe DeMare ( talk) 03:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Yea well Don't delete because you can help add Travis Irvine Sir if you really want to do something constructive.
@ Nevermore27: Requesting comment. put them in Dael4 ( talk) 16:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
I could find nothing on the Ohio SOS website for the general election ballots, but I did find a county example which did not show the Libertarian candidate: http://vote.franklincountyohio.gov/public/documents/PDF/5D964242-E16D-73CB-B828371456C4CC70.pdf 2600:1008:B162:7796:A8CD:CBB1:8AAB:C1D5 ( talk) 15:34, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add these links directly under External links:
![]() | This
edit request to
Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is a democratically elected candidate in Ohio under the rules of the state. There is no reason why Constance Gadell-Newton's candidacy should be removed from this page. I have been defending american democratic values on this page. And have been under attack every since placing her there. Dael4 ( talk) 02:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Consensus#Pitfalls_and_errors "Editors who ignore talk page discussions yet continue to edit in or revert disputed material, or who stonewall discussions, may be guilty of disruptive editing and incur sanctions. Consensus cannot always be assumed simply because editors stop responding to talk page discussions in which they have already participated." ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Consensus#Pitfalls_and_errors ) Dael4 ( talk) 02:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
For the sake of the democratic process here in Ohio and throughout the United States against existing major party anarchy, hopefully setting a new standard for wikipedia, we request that Constance Gadell-Newton's Photo and info box data be put back in place and also Ohio Libertarian Gov. candidate, Travis Irvine be placed/inserted there. Both are legitimate candidates in the state of Ohio. Dael4 ( talk) 02:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
As I have said before importance is proportional to the venue. There are candidates. Present them. Exclusion is not an option. Importance is mutually exclusive in the not having them there screams unequal treatment and prejudice as to effective politicking. Polls say many people value this parties principals. Dael4 ( talk) 05:21, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Back in May I posted on my talk page, "Editing the Ohio gubernatorial elections 2018 and considering the https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1 RFC 1 third parties, Wikipedia has become very undemocratic. Basing inclusion on media coverage and financial backing and not on actual election results. Third party should be allowed regardless because they are on the ballot here. Make no mistake Wikipedia is used basically as a promotional tool by the Democrats and the Republicans and if they cannot include third parties then it proves the lack of democratic action therein Dael4 ( talk) 23:37, 14 May 2018 (UTC) Dael4 ( talk) 05:45, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Bb is an unreliable source with no longstanding reputation for responsible editorial oversight or fact checking. (See also this RfC.) Bb should not be used as a source for anything other than the opinion of Bb. GMG talk 12:49, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
On 15 October 2018, User:Mélencron removed the Green Party and its candidates from the Infobox, explaining in his edit summary, "only Irvine is polling at least 5%." I have restored that content pending consensus, and request clarification of two distinct issues raised by Mélencron.
I urge Mélencron to let stand the Infobox including the Green Party and its nominees until consensus forms for their removal on solid grounds of specific Wikipedia policy. KalHolmann ( talk) 03:22, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Is the Green Party candidate even being polled? The polling table doesn't include her. Why should we include a candidate that isn't being polled in the infobox? I don't know that we should include the Libertarian candidate based on his low polling numbers. – Muboshgu ( talk) 22:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Since 07:14, 17 October 2018 User:Nevermore27 has made four identical reversions in the article space to exclude Green Party nominees from the Infobox. At this talk page, he has declared "there is no rational basis to include" Green Party gubernatorial nominee Constance Gadell-Newton. It is pertinent, I believe, to note that on his user page Nevermore27 has since 6 December 2017 actively supported Gadell-Newton's opponent, Democratic Party gubernatorial nominee Richard Cordray. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, I urge Nevermore27 to recuse himself from further edits to Ohio gubernatorial election, 2018. KalHolmann ( talk) 04:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I'm the campaign manager for the Irvine campaign. The photo we would like to have used is available in multiple places. I cannot upload because I don't have 10 edits. I usually just edit things anonymously even though I've had this account for eons. In any case, if someone would like to have a free-to-use (no license restriction) picture of Travis for the Wikipedia page, please hit me up at https://irvineforohio.com/contact and I'll respond with that picture. Thank you.
I have placed {Connected contributor} at the top of this page in accordance with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, which allows another editor to add that template when the connected contributor does not. At 22:01, 17 October 2018, User:Bnewmark42 revised the article space. Forty-one minutes later, in an unsigned comment on this talk page, he stated, "I'm the campaign manager for the Irvine campaign." Forty minutes thereafter, still without having formally disclosed his COI, he again revised the article space. KalHolmann ( talk) 00:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Why does that map have incorrect country lines? Take a look at Athens for example in this accurate map. - Nusent 18:42, 12 April 2019 (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) 01:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)