![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 8 May 2010. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
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 article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone know what religion Sarah is and what the religion of her parents are? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.28.103 ( talk) 16:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
This article should not be deleted because the individual has received significant, non-trivial, media coverage by reliable sources. See Google News. Be in Nepean ( talk) 20:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Notable enough to meet GNG. The person who won the 2003 Mayoral election was initially in single digits as well, see David_Miller_(Canadian_politician)#2003_Mayoral_campaign. I don't think she'll win but an early poll result is not a reason to render her unnotable. Also, if you read the Google News coverage, her promise to build more subways has influenced other candidates to respond so she is notable. Be in Nepean ( talk) 20:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think she is actually most notabe for being a politician and there was some discussion at the AFD that the article name should be altered, any comments. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Per this, she's registered as "Thomson, Sarah" for the 2010 Toronto mayoral election. Isn't she best known under that name, for that candidacy? (So see WP:TITLE: "Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article....Bill Clinton (not 'William Jefferson Clinton')".) TheFeds 02:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
At the very least, a disambiguation page was a good idea. Makes things less confusing for readers (potentially). Silver seren C 19:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
How about "Sarah Thomson (candidate)" or "Sarah Thomson (Toronto mayoral candidate)"? By the way, she's up to 17% in recent polls, placing her third. I think that's clearly notable. The leader is only on 26%. 99.225.130.171 ( talk) 17:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I tried to clean up this article and add in the allegations she has brought forward. I'll do my best to keep it up to date
The gas station claims are unsupported and should be removed. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.206.161 ( talk) 12:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
@ ThomsonTO: I see you've tried to remove some of the information in the article because it's "wrong based on errors in reports". The sections you've tried to remove are all cited to various news reports in the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and by the CBC, which do seem to validate the claims here and which we normally accept as reliable sources. If you're saying that the information in those news reports is wrong, then I would like to help you fix the article, however you will need to provide sources which demonstrate that the information we have is incorrect, and/or point out how our article does not reflect the information from the sources cited. Wikipedia requires that all information presented is verifiable, normally checked by publication in reliable sources. We also require articles to reflect a neutral point of view, which doesn't mean that we automatically remove negative information, but that reliably-sourced negative information must be presented fairly and without undue bias. Since it appears that you have a conflict of interest I recommend that you suggest improvements to the article on this talk page rather than editing the article directly, and we will do our best to implement your suggestions in a way that best conforms with our guidelines. Thanks. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 18:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Just came out: Her sexual harassment allegations against TVO celebrity host Steve Paikin are all over the news media right now. -- Denis.g.rancourt ( talk) 18:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Ivanvector:: earlier you reduced much of the content regarding the Rob Ford "groping incident"; in particular, the sentence "Others present at the event later suggested that Thomson staged the incident" has a couple of issues: 1) it is somewhat conclusory, but more importantly, 2) it is not quite factual: a) I can't find any "suggesting" within the given references - the "others" in question simply stated what the subject (Thomson) said and did; b) The references state that Thomson made the grope allegation, and then subsequent to that, attempted to stage a 2nd incident for the purpose of capturing a photograph.
As for brevity: I am of the opinion we can devote a few sentences to this; it is notable when the sitting mayor of Canada's largest city allegedly grabs butt; it is similarly notable when the butt owner allegedly becomes "agente provocatrice" in an attempted frame-up of said mayor.
So I suggest: 1. We create a new section devoted to this; 2. We just state the facts as given from the references; 3. We give enough information to give the reader the relevant facts.
I would like to build consenus before making further changes, so please feel free to comment. Wisefroggy ( talk) 05:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
We are dealing with two separate issues here: #1) the alleged groping, and, #2) the subject's attempted alleged attempted frame-up of the mayor. #2 is not, as you say, a "he said she said", it is a "she said, they said", which is substantially different as far as credibility goes. Also note that "flash in the pan" is opinion, not fact. And again, above you say "Ford's chief of staff claimed that the incident was staged", but I cannot find this in any of the references. We need to stick to facts here. So unless anyone has a valid concern, I will add a couple of sentences quoting the two councillors. The fact that the paragraphs about her political career is bare-bones is irrelevant; the above issues have nothing to do with the subject's political career, nor is the subject particularly notable for her political career (wiki lists her as a "publisher", not a politician). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisefroggy ( talk • contribs) 03:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 8 May 2010. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
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 article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone know what religion Sarah is and what the religion of her parents are? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.91.28.103 ( talk) 16:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
This article should not be deleted because the individual has received significant, non-trivial, media coverage by reliable sources. See Google News. Be in Nepean ( talk) 20:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Notable enough to meet GNG. The person who won the 2003 Mayoral election was initially in single digits as well, see David_Miller_(Canadian_politician)#2003_Mayoral_campaign. I don't think she'll win but an early poll result is not a reason to render her unnotable. Also, if you read the Google News coverage, her promise to build more subways has influenced other candidates to respond so she is notable. Be in Nepean ( talk) 20:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think she is actually most notabe for being a politician and there was some discussion at the AFD that the article name should be altered, any comments. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Per this, she's registered as "Thomson, Sarah" for the 2010 Toronto mayoral election. Isn't she best known under that name, for that candidacy? (So see WP:TITLE: "Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article....Bill Clinton (not 'William Jefferson Clinton')".) TheFeds 02:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
At the very least, a disambiguation page was a good idea. Makes things less confusing for readers (potentially). Silver seren C 19:09, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
How about "Sarah Thomson (candidate)" or "Sarah Thomson (Toronto mayoral candidate)"? By the way, she's up to 17% in recent polls, placing her third. I think that's clearly notable. The leader is only on 26%. 99.225.130.171 ( talk) 17:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
I tried to clean up this article and add in the allegations she has brought forward. I'll do my best to keep it up to date
The gas station claims are unsupported and should be removed. ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.206.161 ( talk) 12:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
@ ThomsonTO: I see you've tried to remove some of the information in the article because it's "wrong based on errors in reports". The sections you've tried to remove are all cited to various news reports in the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and by the CBC, which do seem to validate the claims here and which we normally accept as reliable sources. If you're saying that the information in those news reports is wrong, then I would like to help you fix the article, however you will need to provide sources which demonstrate that the information we have is incorrect, and/or point out how our article does not reflect the information from the sources cited. Wikipedia requires that all information presented is verifiable, normally checked by publication in reliable sources. We also require articles to reflect a neutral point of view, which doesn't mean that we automatically remove negative information, but that reliably-sourced negative information must be presented fairly and without undue bias. Since it appears that you have a conflict of interest I recommend that you suggest improvements to the article on this talk page rather than editing the article directly, and we will do our best to implement your suggestions in a way that best conforms with our guidelines. Thanks. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 18:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Just came out: Her sexual harassment allegations against TVO celebrity host Steve Paikin are all over the news media right now. -- Denis.g.rancourt ( talk) 18:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
@ Ivanvector:: earlier you reduced much of the content regarding the Rob Ford "groping incident"; in particular, the sentence "Others present at the event later suggested that Thomson staged the incident" has a couple of issues: 1) it is somewhat conclusory, but more importantly, 2) it is not quite factual: a) I can't find any "suggesting" within the given references - the "others" in question simply stated what the subject (Thomson) said and did; b) The references state that Thomson made the grope allegation, and then subsequent to that, attempted to stage a 2nd incident for the purpose of capturing a photograph.
As for brevity: I am of the opinion we can devote a few sentences to this; it is notable when the sitting mayor of Canada's largest city allegedly grabs butt; it is similarly notable when the butt owner allegedly becomes "agente provocatrice" in an attempted frame-up of said mayor.
So I suggest: 1. We create a new section devoted to this; 2. We just state the facts as given from the references; 3. We give enough information to give the reader the relevant facts.
I would like to build consenus before making further changes, so please feel free to comment. Wisefroggy ( talk) 05:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
We are dealing with two separate issues here: #1) the alleged groping, and, #2) the subject's attempted alleged attempted frame-up of the mayor. #2 is not, as you say, a "he said she said", it is a "she said, they said", which is substantially different as far as credibility goes. Also note that "flash in the pan" is opinion, not fact. And again, above you say "Ford's chief of staff claimed that the incident was staged", but I cannot find this in any of the references. We need to stick to facts here. So unless anyone has a valid concern, I will add a couple of sentences quoting the two councillors. The fact that the paragraphs about her political career is bare-bones is irrelevant; the above issues have nothing to do with the subject's political career, nor is the subject particularly notable for her political career (wiki lists her as a "publisher", not a politician). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisefroggy ( talk • contribs) 03:03, 8 February 2018 (UTC)