This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
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 page is about an active 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. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I messaged Walton on Twitter to ask if she would be willing to CC license a photo for use in this article. I pointed her to c:Commons:Wikimedia OTRS release generator, so hopefully she sees it and is willing. — Wug·a·po·des 04:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
She will become the first socialist mayor of a large city in the US since 1960.
The bad editors of this site really suck. You know who you are. You make this site worse by the day.
AllThatJazz2012 (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
I have great distain for socialism but this candidate has won a primary and,in the state of New York,when a Democrat wins a primary there is a reasonable chance that he or she will hold said elected office. It seems a decision entirely based in political biases rather than any other good reason. I hope Ms. Walton loses. But she didn't and so why eliminate the article? Mrinzeo (talk) 16:43, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
We had a good, collaborative article going this morning, but Jon698 woke up and made this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=India_Walton&diff=1030038534&oldid=1030037411.
His reasoning? "removing unimportant information, reorganizing, removing unsourced information, and adding stuff from the draft I made before this article".
So he was mad that the party started without him last night, and he's trying to replace the good writing we had with whatever he had drafted. He doesn't understand basic grammatical phrasing and I'm about to abandon the article completely. I helped save the article this morning from being deleted by a rogue admin, so I'd like to see it become something high quality. Jon698 for whatever reason believes India's community activism through Open Buffalo and the Fruit Belt Community Land Trust isn't notable, even though I sourced it all and she talks about it repeatedly in all of her interviews - it's a natural stepping stone she took to politics. Jon698 just keeps deleting it. Along with her family's background. And a dozen other things that were sourced. Sad.TheNewMinistry (talk) 20:23, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Isn't she a democratic socialist (if not a member of the Democratic Socialists of America? Most news articles describe her as such, but the current version of this article does not. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
A website says she is born June 14th, 1982. [1] Is it valid? Should it be added to the article? --TheRandomIP (talk) 12:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Regarding India Walton as being the first major city to have a socialist mayor since the 1960s if elected I'm not sure because Sanders was mayor of Burlington in the 1980s. Also I just checked and Ron Dellums was mayor of Oakland from 2007-2011. I understand that major is a vague term, but I feel these two examples make me question how accurate this claim is. Thoughts? 3Kingdoms (talk) 15:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
The section "Legal issues" lends undue weight to certain incidents or controversies, counter to WP:BLPBALANCE. This section should be folded into other sections and presented in a more balanced manner. For example, she has 4 children but that is only mentioned in the infobox. There is no "Personal life" section. All together this article does not give a balanced view of the subject. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:21, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Three additions to the article were deleted today:
This is an almost unknown candidate in an upcoming election, and her past behavior and public comments are being reported in reliable sources. In fact, Walton's apology was front page news in Buffalo. WP:DUE calls for all viewpoints to be considered, but this doesn't mean adding milquetoast edits all over Wikipedia, especially when lots of what is being reported in reliable sources isn't glowing. Moreover, don't fault an editor for reporting tabloid-sounding behaviors about a person who is participating in tabloid-sounding behaviors. Go fight with the Buffalo News for reporting it. If this article is unbalanced, go find reliable sources and balance it. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
The idea expressed in Eventualism—that every Wikipedia article is a work in progress, and that it is therefore okay for an article to be temporarily unbalanced because it will eventually be brought into shape—does not apply to biographies.Quite simply it must be balanced at all times, and the onus is on you to ensure that your edits do not unbalance an article. Second, WP:DUE says that we cover viewpoints in proportion to their coverage in reliable sources. There is a subsection of that policy at WP:PROPORTION that you should read:
discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news.Lastly, WP:NOTTABLOID does not have an exception for when someone gets a lot of tabloid-like coverage, in fact it agrees with the above policies:
Not every facet of a celebrity's life, personal details, matches played, or goal scored is significant enough to be included in the biography of a person.Taken together, our policies on neutrality and biographies set a high bar for inclusion. Walton has received national press coverage discussing her policies and significance in the American political landscape alongside endorsements from federal officials including a Vermont senator; she is not "almost unknown". You confuse us for a local newspaper, but as the world's largest encyclopedia our content is not dictated by what the Buffalo News thinks is important today. Our policies are explicit that we have an editorial role in deciding what aspects are trivial and not worth including. To the billions of other people in the world, what Walton yelled through a bullhorn once is simply not important for understanding her place in the American political landscape. The national press is not buzzing about how she said the word "dick" on Facebook and apologized. A non-notable, self-published comedy podcast with a circulation of 400 is not a high quality source for her views when compared to any policy white paper she has published on her website or which has been covered in the national press. We are not a repository of random quotes you found on the internet, and we are not a play-by-play report of the current news cycle in Buffalo.I'm suspicious of its usefulness, but I'm willing to consider ways of including the information you want that are not copy-pasting whatever unflattering quotes we can find. We're an encyclopedia, not a newspaper or voting guide, and it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. If you can suggest a revision that is in line with those policies and principles, I'm willing to consider it. — Wug·a·po·des 22:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
References
Based on the results of the election, I don't believe that Walton meets WP:NPOL as an unelected municipal candidate. She has been the subject of local, regional, and national coverage, but it seems that most of it covers her election, and not her specifically. I think the page's history should be preserve, given the possibility of a future political career, leading me to believe that a redirect to 2021 Buffalo mayoral election would be the best option here. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KidAd (talk • contribs) 18:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage, and there appears to be substantial support for this in the article, and WP:NPOL also states
Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline.There also appears to be support for WP:GNG, including e.g. Guardian (July 11, 2021, includes biographical information), People (November 1, 2021, includes biographical information and references "a sprawling new profile for The New Yorker"), The Washington Post (November 1, 2021, includes biographical information, noting "As much as her message, Walton’s biography has served as part of her appeal to voters.") It also seems reasonable to expect there will be additional reporting and commentary after the mayoral race is concluded that could further support WP:NPOL notability. But as far as I can tell, she has not yet conceded, and votes are continuing to be counted. Beccaynr (talk) 20:43, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
I am of the belief that the political position section is too long and detailed, especially since it appears she lost her election (see WP:DUE and WP:PROPORTION). I think this can be trimmed to at most two short paragraphs that broadly explain her reason for identifying as a Democratic socialist and a few primary positions that she ran on. --Enos733 (talk) 01:20, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 February 2022 and 22 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gshall2 (article contribs).
BottleOfChocolateMilk, I think it would be better to discuss the various changes I made to your addition, per WP:BRD, than to revert all of it. I outlined a variety of reasons and I am willing to further discuss my reasoning. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
"I spoke with him last week for a good hour, and he said he was running again, so I don't know what changed between now and then. But I think that it's a good decision, and there's time to make way for new ideas."as "expressed surprise, saying he had told her the previous week that he would run for another term." Particularly the "expressed surprise" part, so from my view, it is better to just state what she said.