Talk:Jake Auchincloss

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jake Auchincloss article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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.

This page is about a 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. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Massachusetts Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).

U.S. Congress Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) Person(s).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Reviewer Comments

Taking issue with a comment in an edit summary, Auchincloss is not a Congressman-elect, and does not satisfy political notability or general notability, at least not as Wikipedia policies and guidelines are interpreted by most AFC reviewers. The arguments being made in an edit summary, and, worse, in the body of this draft, that he is now a Congressman-elect because he is in a safe Democratic district are not based on Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I will be declining this draft and will be cautioning that if it is resubmitted again prior to the election, sanctions may be requested for tendentious editing. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:56, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your case is that Auchincloss does not pass GNG because he has only won his primary. Yet many others who have only won their primary have gone on to have wikipedia pages. Look at Marie Newman, Cori Bush, Jamaal Bowman, Lauren Boebert, Carolyn Bourdeaux, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Kat Cammack, Jon Ossoff and Mondaire Jones. Auchincloss has actually been elected to the Newton City Council in the past while all the others that I listed have never held an elected position. How do the others pass GNG, but Auchincloss does not? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 04:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Milton Glimcher is NOT related to Hugh Auchincloss

Under "Early Life and Education" it states that his maternal grandfather, Milton J. Glimcher, is the first cousin once removed of stockbroker Hugh Auchincloss. Milton Glimcher is not related to Hugh Auchincloss and Jake is related to Hugh Auchincloss through his paternal grandfather, Hugh Auchincloss Senior. 216.81.94.71 (talk) 00:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Genealogical entries

@Unfriendnow: You have twice been reverted, per WP:NOTGENEALOGY, for restoring weirdly distant genealogical entries to the article. Rather than edit war, please join this discussion, and gain a consensus for your edit. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies involving parents

There has been disagreement over this passage of the article:

My view is that the deleted sentence is non-neutral in the context of the BLP subject's early life and education. The parents' professions is relevant to his early life and experiences. A diversion into specific controversies in his mother's life, unless those had some direct effect on his early life and education, is not obviously relevant. It also makes the article non-neutral by appearing to cast doubt on his own character through guilt by association (WP:BLPBALANCE). I have asked RiboCop to discuss any further changes rather than reverting them in. arcticocean ■ 09:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi articocean, I appreciate hearing your view here. My view is that the current article displays extreme bias towards positive accomplishments of Auchincloss' family (e.g., "a physician who pioneered the development of artificial limbs and the robotic arm, and was inducted into the National Academy of Sciences"). The controversies related to his mother are clearly notable given their appearance in the popular press (NYT, Boston Globe, etcetera) and if selectively removing such information, as careful editors, we should also prevent Wikipedia articles from being biased puff pieces. Moreover, given that Auchincloss' family had substantially contributed to his political career, it is relevant for readers to appreciate from where and from who his political career has emerged. 129.64.0.39 (talk) 15:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We can trim the accomplishments of his parents, I think. But her "controversies", which I have not read about and am not aware of the validity thereof, have nothing to do with the subject of this article. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can read about the controversies in the three references that were cited in the article and have been persistently deleted in favor of the positively-slanted and poorly cited accomplishments of his relatives. 129.64.0.39 (talk) 16:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are correct that his father's accomplishments are also irrelevant, and risk making the article overly positive. Something like this would strike a better balance: Both of his parents are physician-scientists. His father is a surgeon and his mother the executive of a medical research company. arcticocean ■ 17:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think his father's government service, including temporarily heading NIAID, is worth keeping, lest we assume Hugh was merely working as a surgeon in some random hospitals. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articocean, it is not exactly fair and balanced that you would make an ad hominem attack and then close the discussion after having the last word. No one has bothered to edit other sections or provide a clear logical argument why major newsworthy facts about Auchincloss' family should be omitted from the wikipedia page. You appear to have major political conflicts of interest. RiboCop (talk) 19:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article on Jake Auchincloss, not his mother. If you think his mother is notable enough to have an Wikipedia article, feel free to create one, and add well-referenceed facts to it. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 23:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She has an article. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful digression

This part of the discussion was an unhelpful digression and in the interest of moving the discussion forward, I am closing it. arcticocean ■ 17:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi Muboshgu, like you I believe in spreading the truth. Please read those citations and then answer me whether the text you have continually reverted is false? And provide a logical argument for why is is not relevant and noteworthy. Thank you. RiboCop (talk) 17:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did I say it was false? No, I didn't. I said it's not about the subject of this article. That's why it shouldn't be here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have not reverted other text about Auchincloss' family though, only this text which you previously said "I have not read about and am not aware of the validity" as a reason to delete it? Clearly Auchincloss' family is a subject of this article, of which this text is extremely relevant. RiboCop (talk) 17:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not see where I said We can trim the accomplishments of his parents? Did you expect me to jump in and make other edits when this page has been in the midst of a three-day edit war that required full page protection? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the first time that you have been told this, but I shall say again that the accuracy of the information is not the issue. The problem is that the mother's wrongdoing is not relevant to the subject's early life and education, creating a significant issue in terms of WP:NPOV and WP:BLPBALANCE. arcticocean ■ 17:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is the grandfathers accomplishments any more relevant? RiboCop (talk) 17:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is headed Controversies involving parents. I suggest that you start a new thread about that sentence should you wish to discuss it. arcticocean ■ 17:23, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article fully protected for three days due to edit-warring. Favonian (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]