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.
This page is biased towards/against Lindell because it mentions (or doesn't mention) X! Why won't you fix it?
Having a neutral point of view does not mean giving equal weight to all viewpoints. Rather, it refers to Wikipedia's effort to discuss topics and viewpoints in a roughly equal proportion to the degree that they are discussed in reliable sources, which in political articles is mostly mainstream media. For further information, please read Wikipedia:Guide to addressing bias.
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 sourcedmust 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 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 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
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
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
It appears there is very little information about Mr. Liddel's business dealings, of which he originally gained his notoriety. Word count per topic in biographical information should be in proportion to the subject's most important or significant acheivements (or failures) with balance and objectivity. Those criticizing Mr. Liddel do themselves a diservice by bringing the credibility of the page into question, offering overwhelmingly one-sided political coverage of the individual. Please consider including more information about Mr. Liddel's business dealings. How many employees does he have? How quicklyl did he grow the company? How many My Pillows (or other products) have been sold? Is he known as an effective leader or has he been embroiled in workplace misconduct? How big is his following and for what may he be admired or hated? While I don't question the truthfulness of the page, it seems lacks balance and appears to possess an overabundance of political bias, which is unfortunate since most who overcome addiction to find business success and faith or direction often benefit from at the very least a balance of coverage, if not some level of admiration, neither of which Mr. Liddel is not afforded on this page. A proper historical account ought to have much less bias. This is crowdsourced encylcopedia, not a town square or a whipping post, not a social media platform... 67.163.154.224 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As you say - this encyclopaedia is created by its contributors so why not contribute WP:DIY rather than merely criticise Robynthehode (talk) 13:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Details about Lindell's business, including the answers to several of your questions, can be found in the article on that business (My Pillow). While it's sometimes appropriate for multiple Wikipedia articles to contain the same information, I can't really see the need in this case. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I can say for sure, a large body of the American population will read a bit, see how bias it is and not read further. I know people have strong feelings about this person but this article is frankly not an encyclopedia article, it has to many elements of an opinion piece. It may be better to say: "Mike has been accused of being a conspiracy theory because of X Y and Z", however simple declaring him one is taking a side on something that doesn't have consensus. Q9d87777d (talk) 02:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Q9d87777d – are you referring to the lede? Lede is a brief summary of article, and is specifically kept concise and terse as possible. Explanatory "X Y Z" and elucidation can be found in article body; but doesn't belong in lede.
Not our problem if individuals reading article don't like what they find – that's their problem, and a disservice to themselves.
Wikipedia has selection bias – one shared by our sources. We can't control the biases of upstream sources we rely upon, nor have control over what they say. Structurally, we are required to parrot them. Our job as an encyclopaedia is to make note of what WP:RS say or find notable. That's it. Nothing more. Nothing less. If upstream overwhelmingly take sides, that is societies' "problem" to fix, not Wikipedia. -- dsprc[talk] 10:59, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect information in the "Attempts to overturn 2020 presidential election" section.[edit]
The section includes the text "Lindell's own cybersecurity expert said that his purported evidence was a "pile of nothing" and found no proof of election fraud." I hadn't heard of this person or his involvement in the Trump debacle, but on becoming interested and reading further (just following the references attached to the above quoted sentence) its clear from the video that it is incorrect to present this as "lindell's own cybersecurity expert" the video clearly shows that the expert who the quote is attributed to was bought along by the CNN reporter Donnie.
He does indeed say that the (lack of) evidence produced is a big pile of nothing, but Lindell definitely had no part in inviting this expert to the event.
Wikipedia should be a source of factual information, not information that is twisted to represent the popular view. Lindell may be a conspiracy theorist and everything that he says about the election is probably false, or atleast he has no evidence to support it, but the facts shouldnt be distorted to support this view.
I read this and you're right, it's incorrect in the article. Mr O’Sullivan brought to the conference with him a cybersecurity expert, Harri Hursti, who said the data made available did not come close to proving the election was stolen – and that in fact, what little Mr Lindell provided in the way of “evidence” bore no relation to electoral machinery, the supposed medium of electoral interference.Donie O'Sullivan (journalist) brought Harri Hursti. Great news, they both have articles. I will rewrite this now. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How's this? Lindell held a three-day "Cyber Symposium" ending August 12, promising to present "irrefutable evidence" of election fraud, but none was produced. Reporter Donie O'Sullivan brought cybersecurity expert Harri Hursti to the conference, and Hursti said that Lindell's purported evidence was a "pile of nothing" and found no proof of election fraud. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks much better to me, it is a stroke of luck that both the reporter and expert had pages that already existed. Completely understandable that pages like this are protected against sock puppetry and other attempts to whitewash history but darn frustrating when you identify a mistake and can't do anything to fix it.
Thank you so much for jumping in when I was unable to correct the webpage! Most appreciated Vimknight (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could it be appropriate to add "one cannot help but wonder if Lindell's prior crack addiction is an explanation for his erratic behavior." HelperHelper1 (talk) 18:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, unless you have a citation of someone saying that, preferably a medical professional(which you won't get because no legitimate medical professional would say that without examining him). 331dot (talk) 19:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. I see your point. The fact that many wonder if his prior crack addiction helps to explain his bizarre and erratic behavior is irrelevant unless it is true that his prior crack addiction helps to explain his bizarre and erratic behavior. One might find it relevant that "many" do wonder about that, but you make a good point that he should get medical treatment to make that determination. HelperHelper1 (talk) 15:00, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Tollens (talk) 01:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Tollens (talk) 01:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)