Loading

  • 21 Aug, 2019

  • By, Wikipedia

Talk:Kamala Harris
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
  • You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

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.

Further information
Enforcement procedures:
  • Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
  • Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions.
  • Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism.
  • In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
  • Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
  • Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Wage theft

A Politico article on her campaign just reported, "... the campaign’s decision to stop paying many senior staff as of Saturday, even those initially told they would be paid through the end of the year."

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/16/kamala-harris-donors-00190020

This was worth mentioning when Trump stiffed people that he owed money to, so it's worth mentioning when Harris did the exact same thing.

The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 02:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"when Trump stiffed people" Which Trump? The Family of Donald Trump has included several shady businesspeople. Dimadick (talk) 11:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was it, or was it in fact different? Slatersteven (talk) 11:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alleged fraud and alleged insolvency are not the same thing. And notice as well that the campaign is raising money to pay off debts, not filing for bankruptcy protection in order to avoid them. The allegations against Trump if true were criminal. TFD (talk) 14:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KInd of irrelevant as many of his companies did declare bankruptcy, which means they did not pay all their debts. Alo Trumo has been prosecuted for fraud, it's not just an allegation. Slatersteven (talk) 14:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trump is not the topic of this talk page. Shouldn't "the campaign's decision" belong on the campaign talk page, not this one? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just making the point "its not analogous". Slatersteven (talk) 15:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to point the reply at you directly, Slatersteven. That point is for everyone. Surely there are differences between this and what Trump has been accused of doing. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I do not subscribe to the "fairness doctrine"-esque notion that because something is mentioned in regard to the conduct of one politician it ought be mentioned in another politician's article, wage theft has a specific legal connotation, and until such is adjudicated, it is best to surmise the state of the campaign as having "encountered financial difficulties" rather than "engaged in wage theft". Moreover, the phrasing of theft invokes a particular scienter and moral status for which does not appear justified in application to this concern as of now.Irruptive Creditor (talk) 08:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Harris speaking Tamil

Slatersteven, regarding this sentence:

In addition to English, Harris speaks Tamil.

References

  1. ^ "Kamala Harris and I very briefly spoke in Tamil: Tel K Ganesan". The Times of India. 2020-08-18. ISSN 0971-8257. Archived from the original on February 4, 2023. Retrieved 2024-11-06.

There is a source cited; however, by my reading, it does not verify the statement that Harris speaks Tamil - only that Tel K Ganesan said that [they] very briefly spoke in Tamil together (the full sentence from the source being “We very briefly spoke in Tamil – vanakkam and nandri. We did talk about sambar,” [Ganesan] grins.).

Without sourcing to directly support the statement of Harris speaking Tamil, therefore, I'd support it being removed from the article as unverifiable – as far as I can see, the current source would only support the fact that someone else said they spoke briefly in Tamil with Harris. I apologise if I should have explained more in my edit summary. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 15:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, well if a witness says they both spoke in Tamil I am unsure we really need anything better (if you speak in Tamil, by inference you can speak it, so it seems a reasonable paraphrasing). But by all means change it to "spoke a few words of Tamil with Ganesan", if this really is a problem Slatersteven (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave this article for a bit before doing anything else in order to get some more input from people watching this page, but my understanding is that a source quoting a witness isn't enough for us to repeat what the witness said as a fact in wikivoice (in addition to potential issues with speaks Tamil being ambiguous about the level of language knowledge). I'm also not sure that it'd be particularly worth including something along the lines of In 2020, Tel Ganesan stated that he "very briefly spoke in Tamil" with Harris in the article (as, at that point, it seems like it may not be particularly worth mentioning); but I'll step out of the discussion for now to allow other editors to opine :) All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 15:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah now wp:undue is a better objection, and on those grounds, I can see an issue with this content, but not with the idea it fails wp:v.SO to the user who added this, why is this relevant? Slatersteven (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK give it another 24 hours, if there is no justification go ahead and remove it as undue. Slatersteven (talk) 11:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Re-removed ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 11:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That article on the list of donors

What happened to that? The last time I saw it, it was one of the largest on Wikipedia? Tavantius (talk) 00:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It got divided up. See this discussion for details. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kamala_Harris&oldid=1262933787"