This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Edward Snowden material is not relevant in this article. Anybody can start one of these petitions, and there has been hundreds, if not thousands, of them. There is no reason at all to list one that hasn't seen a response from the White House, let alone one that hasn't even reached the threshold number of signatures needed to trigger a response.
I'm moving the section here per WP:PRESERVE. I invite the user who is edit warring to include it to come here and make his case per WP:BURDEN.
=== Edward Snowden ===
Edward Snowden, who revealed his identity after making revelations about the existence of PRISM, a top secret surveillance system operated by the NSA, was the subject of a petition to be granted "a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have committed related to blowing the whistle on secret NSA surveillance programs." [1] [2] The petition had gathered more than 80,000 signatures on June 17, 2013. [3]
- ^ Stableford, Dylan (June 9, 2013). "NSA whistleblower revealed as Edward Snowden, 29-year-old ex-CIA employee". Yahoo! News. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
- ^ Ball, James (June 9, 2013). "Edward Snowden identifies himself as source of NSA leaks – live". The Guardian. Retrieved June 9, 2013.
- ^ Peterson, Josh (June 17, 2013). "Petetion to pardon Snowden passes 80,000". The Daily Caller.
Federales ( talk) 20:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
"However, the White House will typically not comment when a petition concerns any investigation which may be ongoing." I don't see any reason to think there will be any speculation, nor is there any reason for additional explanation on why We the People follows its own policy. Federales ( talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I removed I section named List of petitions with over 100,000 signatures, since it is totally unsourced. I don't know how one could argue that a section named this should exist but at the very least, we'd need secondary sources for each an every entry. TippyGoomba ( talk) 18:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Isn't this site facilitating people's right to petition the government for a redress of grievances as defined in the First Amendment? Traditionally, petitions were sent to Congress instead of the President and administration, but it seems to (as least attempt anyway) help the public be able to do so in a modern way. I'm a bit surprised that this hasn't been mentioned at all in this article, though the petition clause of the First Amendment does tend to be overlooked. 68.46.9.6 ( talk) 10:20, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
It has been almost 2 years since the discussion above regarding the petition to pardon Edward Snowden (direct link has been blocked as explained here). As far as I can tell, there has yet to be a response from the Whitehouse, despite meeting the 100,000 threshold (164,836 to be exact). This, in itself, seems very notable and worthy of inclusion. This article from June of 2014 is the most obvious/recent source.
In addition to the specific notability of the Snowden case, this article also lists additional failures of response to threshold-crossing petitions, which also seems very notable. 108.212.239.102 ( talk) 22:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
It appears as though the site is still up and running. All the posts that were there under the Obama administration are now gone and archived on obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/petitions. Petitions are still allowed and new ones are coming in. What the requirements are going to be, i'm not sure as they seem to have copied some of the original about pages. GeekInParadise ( talk) 21:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
We really should have one. Most insane? Eg Declare George Soros a terrorist and seize his assets, that's as nutty as you get. Doug Weller talk 17:04, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
In early 2018 the system was relaunched. I haven't found any confirmation that the Trump administration has responded to any inquiries, but also find very few reliable sources that looked into this. Probably worth discussing though. Does anyone know reliable sources on this topic? effeiets anders 07:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
The URL for the platform does now indeed redirect to the whitehouse website homepage. But there isn't any source linked. And the current version of the article says "taken down by the Biden administration". Do other users feel this it is fair say it this way if a third party source can't be found? We should at least try to find a third party source that is somewhat reliable. So far I have only seen this in social media though. At least the Wayback Machine has captured the redirect on the day it happened so I think this could be used as a source for now. As of the language, as there has been no official explanation or third party coverage I'm intending to edit the article with more neutral language. If you'd like to contest this edit please consider writing in response in here first. Gnkgr ( talk) 23:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Edward Snowden material is not relevant in this article. Anybody can start one of these petitions, and there has been hundreds, if not thousands, of them. There is no reason at all to list one that hasn't seen a response from the White House, let alone one that hasn't even reached the threshold number of signatures needed to trigger a response.
I'm moving the section here per WP:PRESERVE. I invite the user who is edit warring to include it to come here and make his case per WP:BURDEN.
=== Edward Snowden ===
Edward Snowden, who revealed his identity after making revelations about the existence of PRISM, a top secret surveillance system operated by the NSA, was the subject of a petition to be granted "a full, free, and absolute pardon for any crimes he has committed or may have committed related to blowing the whistle on secret NSA surveillance programs." [1] [2] The petition had gathered more than 80,000 signatures on June 17, 2013. [3]
- ^ Stableford, Dylan (June 9, 2013). "NSA whistleblower revealed as Edward Snowden, 29-year-old ex-CIA employee". Yahoo! News. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
- ^ Ball, James (June 9, 2013). "Edward Snowden identifies himself as source of NSA leaks – live". The Guardian. Retrieved June 9, 2013.
- ^ Peterson, Josh (June 17, 2013). "Petetion to pardon Snowden passes 80,000". The Daily Caller.
Federales ( talk) 20:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
"However, the White House will typically not comment when a petition concerns any investigation which may be ongoing." I don't see any reason to think there will be any speculation, nor is there any reason for additional explanation on why We the People follows its own policy. Federales ( talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I removed I section named List of petitions with over 100,000 signatures, since it is totally unsourced. I don't know how one could argue that a section named this should exist but at the very least, we'd need secondary sources for each an every entry. TippyGoomba ( talk) 18:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Isn't this site facilitating people's right to petition the government for a redress of grievances as defined in the First Amendment? Traditionally, petitions were sent to Congress instead of the President and administration, but it seems to (as least attempt anyway) help the public be able to do so in a modern way. I'm a bit surprised that this hasn't been mentioned at all in this article, though the petition clause of the First Amendment does tend to be overlooked. 68.46.9.6 ( talk) 10:20, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
It has been almost 2 years since the discussion above regarding the petition to pardon Edward Snowden (direct link has been blocked as explained here). As far as I can tell, there has yet to be a response from the Whitehouse, despite meeting the 100,000 threshold (164,836 to be exact). This, in itself, seems very notable and worthy of inclusion. This article from June of 2014 is the most obvious/recent source.
In addition to the specific notability of the Snowden case, this article also lists additional failures of response to threshold-crossing petitions, which also seems very notable. 108.212.239.102 ( talk) 22:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
It appears as though the site is still up and running. All the posts that were there under the Obama administration are now gone and archived on obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/petitions. Petitions are still allowed and new ones are coming in. What the requirements are going to be, i'm not sure as they seem to have copied some of the original about pages. GeekInParadise ( talk) 21:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
We really should have one. Most insane? Eg Declare George Soros a terrorist and seize his assets, that's as nutty as you get. Doug Weller talk 17:04, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
In early 2018 the system was relaunched. I haven't found any confirmation that the Trump administration has responded to any inquiries, but also find very few reliable sources that looked into this. Probably worth discussing though. Does anyone know reliable sources on this topic? effeiets anders 07:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
The URL for the platform does now indeed redirect to the whitehouse website homepage. But there isn't any source linked. And the current version of the article says "taken down by the Biden administration". Do other users feel this it is fair say it this way if a third party source can't be found? We should at least try to find a third party source that is somewhat reliable. So far I have only seen this in social media though. At least the Wayback Machine has captured the redirect on the day it happened so I think this could be used as a source for now. As of the language, as there has been no official explanation or third party coverage I'm intending to edit the article with more neutral language. If you'd like to contest this edit please consider writing in response in here first. Gnkgr ( talk) 23:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)