Talk:Madeleine A. Pickens

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

Age issue[edit]

I've removed the latest edit by User:Trudyjh as it was very much outside of the format that we can use in articles, and included comments regarding an individual e-mail, which is not a reliable source. As I suggested in the discussion on this at Editor Assistance, I would suggest that if there's a clash here between the various references, something along the lines of Collin Raye be used: sources for both ages be found and inserted into the article. This NYT article is definitely a good source for her age for the one side. I'll keep an eye on things and help out if I can. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

THE MATHS ARE WRONG[edit]

The maths in the first sentence are not correct. If she married Mr. Paulson in 1988 and remained married to him until his death in 2000, then they were married for twelve years not two. In the alternative the date of marriage may be incorrect. It is fair to assume you got it right as to when Mr. Paulson died, but I wouldn't bet any money on it. This is another example of why Wikipedia is completely unacceptable for serious information and is a complete joke. You want serious information, then you pay money for proper research not this free garbage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.245.202.34 (talk) 20:45, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Content[edit]

For a controversial individual such as Ms. Pickens, it is quite important to be neutral and that the cited material match the content; the behavior of the Elko County commissioners being a case in point. Also, blogs are not reliable sources, and it is important to note that this is not an appropriate article to spend a lot of time discussing the politics of the BLM. I am curious if it can be sourced when she came to the United States and more on her business interests and life prior to her marriage to Paulson. Montanabw(talk) 09:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It is not a universal opinion that Ms. Pickens is a "controversial individual".
  2. "the behavior of the Elko County commissioners being a case in point" All bringing that from the LasVegasNow (LVN) investigative report (IR) into the WP article, the way you did, is takimg sides in the dispute. The LVN IR is very biased towards Pickens claim that Elko County is holding her to an undue standard, but there's nothing from Elko County's side. The only reason for using the LVN IR as the source is to provide verification that Pickens is considering shutting down the eco-resort. People can read the LVN IR to get Pickens side, the WP article doesn't need to be slanted towards it. If you want to put Pickens' side in there, you should find a source that talks about Elko County's side. Personally, what I get from the LVN IR is now that Pickens has spent a lot of money, she feels entitled to Elko County relaxing building codes for her so she's running to the media with cherry-picked issues that, on their face, seem unreasonable. For instance, the earthquake proof cooler. What the LVN IR doesn't talk about it is, Wells, Nevada had a severe earthquake nine years ago, (http://www.reviewjournal.com/trending/silver-state/8-biggest-earthquakes-nevada-history) and I recently read something where seismologists say another one is likely to occur in the near future. My guess is that earthquake-proofing the cooler means modifying the shelves so that they don't fall over on someone, or so everything doesn't come flying off them in an earthquake, something that would cost relatively little to do. Doesn't seem unreasonable when you have all the facts, does it?
  3. "blogs are not reliable sources" depends on what it is sourcing. The "Saving America's Mustangs" and "Mustang Monument" sites aren't the most stellar references either (for that matter, neither are the LVR IRs), but are okay for what they are sourcing.
  4. "this is not an appropriate article to spend a lot of time discussing the politics of the BLM" The article discusses the history of the eco-resort and sanctuary. These have been of high interest to public in recent years, as evidenced by the plethora of sources on the subject, and the interactions with the BLM are a necessary part of the story. If you think there are "politics" being discussed, feel free to be more specific, rather than make vague implications.
  5. "I am curious if it can be sourced when she came to the United States and more on her business interests and life prior to her marriage to Paulson." Well, then, maybe you should spend your time finding that instead of trying to control how I edit the article. As far as I'm concerned, the only reason she is notable is because of her activities after her marriage to Paulson. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if you want to "teach the controversy" you should bring up the fact that many people hold Pickens responsible for the horses that died last summer, because they had not been checked regularly (see the comments here). This article states that a ranch hand was supposed to be checking on them regularly, but had that been the case, the problem would have been discovered much sooner than it was. I personally would not go that far, but if the article is going to be turned into something that would be published by the National Enquirer, it should go all the way. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 20:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with being comprehensive. Keep in mind that WP:BLP governs this article and thus it has to be held to a higher standard when discussing potentially libelous or controversial material. I think it's important to point out as full of a story as possible; if her negligence was at issue, then so long as there is no WP:BLP issue and reliable sources (as opposed to rumor) exist, it can be discussed. (per WP:UNDUE, of course) No one WP:OWNs this article and if there are serious disputes, it is possible to request a third opinion. There is no doubt a balance can be found between the views of the Elko County Commissioners and the Cloud Foundation. Montanabw(talk) 22:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't asking for permission or guidance to do anything, and I'm not intimidated by all your WP:Alpha-eff'n-soup. Stop the condescension. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 03:30, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to engage in personal attacks. Remember that wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, that generally consensus is required for major changes, but absent consensus, we must remember that WP:NPOV is a policy on wikipedia, and particularly when it comes to biographies of living persons, we cannot use wikipedia as a front to do a "hachet job" on a person that an individual editor may dislike. Montanabw(talk) 08:49, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now, as well as being condescending (A good start to get past that would be to get rid of the royal "we", you are casting aspersions by:

  1. Using "reminders" to imply that I am in violation of WP policies.
  2. Implying I am making personal attacks because I criticize your behavior.
  3. Implying I am using WP to do a "'hachet job' on a person that (I) may dislike."

Just because the article is about a woman and has the word "horse" in it you are not the senior editor of it. If you don't like the way I react to the pathologically condescending manner in which you act like you are, change your behavior. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 14:01, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember that this isn’t about you at all. It is about a potentially libelous WP:BLP and the five pillars of wikipedia editing, two of which are a neutral point of view and verifiability. Collaboration is part of the wikipedia editing process, as has been repeatedly explained to you by any number of other editors besides myself. This isn’t the place for someone to do a hatchet job on Madeline Pickens. Montanabw(talk) 20:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then stop making it about me by casting aspersions by implying that I don't collaborate. Stop making unsupported criticisms with no specific examples and actually back up what you are saying. Because right now what I hear you saying is: "I want this article to be slanted favorably towards Ms. Pickens, and as senior editor of all articles with an equine nexus, you either have to edit the article the way I want it, or I will pick away at you until I get my way." Lynn (SLW) (talk) 15:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madeleine A. Pickens. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Madeleine_A._Pickens&oldid=1209753178"