Jump to content

Talk:Heather Lind

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Huh? Category "21st-century Afghan actresses"? Nothing in the article support that. 212.50.203.198 (talk) 07:00, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2017

[edit]

She is widely known for her works in reporting of George H Bush sexual assault. 68.101.221.21 (talk) 04:48, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 05:10, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This smacks of WP:RECENTISM. Where is the WP:NPOV with the follow up apology? If this is what the subject is "widely known" for, the undue weight of insertion for the article warrants its notable inclusion. IMHO Maineartists (talk) 17:40, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MeToo Campaign

[edit]

Since this topic is subject to WP:Recentism. Ms. Lind has used the term "Sexual Assault" in her first encounter with the President, but then resolves to using the simpler action of "touch" after the fact. The undue weight of implication toward the President of the United States needs more equal WP:NPOV with a full statement release of apology and explanation; not a trivial admission that he had done it before. Maineartists (talk) 01:53, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you vis a vis the accusation of "sexual assault". I tried to re-write the paragraph to call it "inappropriate touching" rather than "sexual assault", but the editor who put the "sexual assault" back in has a valid point in that Lind did use those words. It seems that Lind herself figured out that she mis-characterized the incident, but she is unfortunately not mature enough to admit her mistake, so the best she could do was to delete her Instagram post. I think your addition of the full statement by G.H.W. Bush's spokesperson is the proper way to create an WP:NPOV presentation given this mess that Lind created. Sometimes the sky is blue (talk) 04:21, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Lind had a rethink and deleted her post. I'd wager she's likely deleted it on the advice of her attorney and not because of any inaccuracy or second thoughts. She knows exactly what he did and what he said and so does he and the people around him. They know he does this and he's always got away with it apparently, up until now. They even admitted it, and that should be put back in. Regarding due weight on the POTUS bit, I don't see any policy that says a former or sitting POTUS gets a pass or special consideration here. I do think that's why he's been getting away with it, because he is a former POTUS and the women don't want to go up against that. But Lind had the courage to speak out. Well done her. Bodding (talk) 21:03, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion, as well as mine, of Lind's actions are irrelevant. The only thing of concern is presenting the story in a neutral point of view. This is not about anybody getting "a pass or special consideration". Since Lind made an explosive allegation of sexual assault, it is proper and necessary to present the full response. Had Lind's allegation stopped at inappropriate touching, I would have said that the response from the president's spokesperson could be trimmed down and summarized. But unfortunately, that's not what she did. Therefore, in the interest of WP:NPOV, the paragraph needs to be as long as it currently is. Sometimes the sky is blue (talk) 21:30, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yet, you didn't hesitate to give your opinion here about Lind's motives which you cannot possibly know. I was simply pointing out the flaws in your opinion as well as the flaws in the argument that Bush should be given a pass because he's a former (thankfully former and I tip my hat to the American constitution for term limits) POTUS. Bodding (talk) 19:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Did anybody make the argument that Bush should be given a pass? Sometimes the sky is blue (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, they did not. Some people are here to grind an axe or right "great wrongs", not build an encyclopedia. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 11:55, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heather Lind. 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:

When 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:48, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Heather_Lind&oldid=1207855650"