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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma 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.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
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
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 Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
To my knowledge that is not common amongst public figures on Wikipedia, and I would be hard pressed to find any in politics like Cornel West who are not controversial. Why is he described this way? 195.194.50.6 (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Better, but I still dunno if it’s really warranted. I’d assume there would be more sources than just two if he was this universally regarded as controversial. We do have a controversy section but it seems to be about his personal life, something entirely different from what the sources say he’s controversial for, and that to the best of my knowledge isn’t touched in in the article. (Also, as the first verb in the sentence is “is”, “been” does not make sense here. It’d either be “is” again or “has been described by XYZ as” with attribution to the sources and as to why he’s controversial at all, which imo is far better. ser!(chat to me - see my edits)16:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to move it to the controversies section and do more work to tease out exactly what those 2 RS and other RS are referring to before proposing a lead summary Superb Owl (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Criticism sections are bad style and the information in them should be placed in the relevant section of the article. For example, criticism of his candidacy as being a spoiler belongs in the section about his candidacy.
Also, mentioning criticism without saying who it came from or how widespread it is violates WP:WEASEL. As far as the reader knows, the criticism could have come from a conspiracy theory website. TFD (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that this is largely either partisan hyperbole or speculation. Notice the phrasing saying "could be" and "possible" and so on. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we write about what HAS happened, not what MIGHT happen.--User:Namiba17:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But this is the most notable part of the campaign that gets the most attention in WP:RS - why would we not mention it? And do you not have any issues with the rest of the proposed addition other than the spoiler effect part? Superb Owl (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References
^Gibson, Brittany (January 10, 2024). "'It Will Be a Nail Biter': A Third-Party Scholar on the 2024 Election". Politico. They almost certainly won't win the White House. But in a close race between presumptive nominees Donald Trump and Joe Biden, a third-party candidate could easily siphon off enough votes in one state or another to tip the election. They could absolutely play 'spoiler.'
^Gibson, Brittany; Shepard, Steven; Ramírez, Isabella; Mitovich, Jared (June 25, 2024). "Where third-party candidates could spoil 2024". Politico. Independent and third-party candidates are potential disruptors for Joe Biden and Donald Trump in a race expected to be decided by razor thin margins.
^Collins, Terry (April 10, 2024). "Longshot candidate Cornel West chooses obscure Los Angeles academic for his running mate". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-08-26. West is also 'unlikely to get on the ballot in all 50 states,' but he could emerge as a spoiler candidate if enough progressive voters support him, said David Paleologos, director of Suffolk's Political Research Center who helps oversee the poll. He received about 7% of the Black vote in the poll, which could hurt Biden's chances for reelection, Paleologos said.
^"RFK Jr., Cornel West approved for ballot in Wisconsin - CBS Minnesota". www.cbsnews.com. 2024-08-28. Retrieved 2024-08-28. Republicans and their allies have worked to get West on the ballot in Wisconsin and other states in the hope that West will help boost Trump's chances of winning by pulling support from Harris. West does not need to win a state to serve as a spoiler candidate — a few thousand votes in battleground states could be decisive.
^Masciotra, David (December 29, 2023). "Cornel West Is the Charlatan of the Year". The New Republic. ISSN0028-6583. Retrieved 2024-08-24. His alliances also betray his proclamations of 'love,' 'service,' and 'justice.' A so-called 'revolutionary Christian,' West has praised and appeared at events with the likes of Claudia De La Cruz, the presidential candidate for the Party for Socialism and Liberation. As David Corn reported for Mother Jones, the PSL supports Kim Jong Un's pursuit of nuclear weapons and defends the Chinese government against accusations of human rights abuses. Among West's other allies are former Radio Sputnik hosts who revere Putin and compliment the Chinese Communist Party as an 'inspiration.'
This article, in its current state, uses what seems to me to be an excessive amount of "Non-primary sources needed" warnings. For a couple examples, Princeton's own website is not considered a valid source for the claim that Dr. West worked there, and the American Philosophical Society's own list of members is not considered a valid source for the claim that Dr. West was a member.
To my understanding of the rules, both at the top of the page and at the relevant template, this isn't how it works for non-controversial information about a living person, self-published or not. It seems to me that someone took issue with any primary source usage whatsoever, which is not the policy. Moreover, if the material were really objectionable, I believe the policy is to remove it, not apply this template. So I think the template should be, broadly speaking, removed from the article. The other two options (finding other sources, or removing the tagged statements) seem overly restrictive. Please advise. 76.115.208.115 (talk) 04:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I would add that there are some sentences in the article that cite to Democracy Matters and other works, which I think is totally legitimate. If he wrote a book, I think it's fair to cite that book when stating an opinion of his. Dauntbares (talk) 01:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.jpg)
