# Talk:Dear White Staffers

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/04/29/the-person-behind-the-account-that-blew-up-capitol-hill-00028270
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/04/inside-congressional-staffer-instagram-rebellion-00005505
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/instagram-account-the-hill-congress-secrets-b2008070.html
https://www.thebulwark.com/congresss-new-complaints-box/
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2022/12/30/trumps-tax-trove-revealed-00075850
https://newrepublic.com/article/167058/dear-white-staffers-instagram-interview-unionize-capitol-hill
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/04/dear-white-staffers-congress/
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/congressional-workers-union-dear-white-staffers
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:19, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dear White Staffers/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sammielh (talk · contribs) 16:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I'll pick up this review. Comments below. Sammielh (talk) 16:54, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @Sammielh! I've left replies wherever I didn't do as asked :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I've replied in a few places below but I'm happy to promote this to GA. Good work on the article! Sammielh (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)


### Lead and infobox
I would put when the account was created in the lead (e.g. "The account was created in ... primarily to post memes")
I don't have much experience with internet culture articles but would it be worth putting the actual Instagram handle in the lead?
Probably not? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
That's fine, I was just thinking how some tv/movie articles include how the title is stylised. Sammielh (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Possibly too much detail for the lead, but I would be inclined to indicate who the account has received praise from (e.g. the national press)
I'd say too much detail. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Optional but could be worth updating the followers in the infobox
Appropriate fair use image


### Background, reactions
Person of color is linked in the body but not the lead
"Dear White Staffers recounted to Politico" I would possibly rephrase to distinguish the account manager from the account
"has been treated differently than white staffers by the Capitol Police"
I would amend "Staffers of color often feel that formal channels of complaint are not responsive to them for some negative experiences, such as frequent microaggressions" as I find it confusingly worded, it seems to imply that only some experiences are not being responded to which I think is different from the source
I would change "in the matter" as I don't think it's specific enough
The Bulwark is linked twice
There's some discrepancy over whether black is capitalised
I would consider nothing that the "Rooney rule" is not consistently followed, per the Politico source
I would link Capitol South station to Cap South (which is what I assume the post is referring to)
I wouldn't be sure about that, but you're probably right. Haven't added to avoid OR, but I'll mull it over. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
It's not critical and I agree that it borders on OR, just thought I would mention. Sammielh (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Quotes should have a reference immediately following them
I'll challenge you to provide a policy source on that? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
I originally tried to find the policy source for this when I mentioned it and wasn't able to (no idea who told me this), so happy to drop this point. Sammielh (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
@Sammielh: I believe you're referring to Wikipedia:Verifiability, which states that All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material. While inline citations can be at the end of sentences, its also alright for them to be at the end of the paragraph. :3 F4U (they/it) 16:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I would be inclined to add in the years for the film and tv show of Dear White People for some context
I'm not sure it's necessary, it's just a loose reference.
I would put "By the end of January 2022" as it's a new section
"Politico referred to the stories reposted by the account"
Are there any account statistics or coverage from 2023?
No secondary stats that I'm aware of, no.


### References
The Earwig results come back with 29%, which is primarily due to the quotes in the article, although it does flag the phrase "code of silence" which should probably be rephrased
I didn't see any issues with the spotchecks

Here’s a May 2023 Politico article about Dear White Staffers that should help build out the article: [1] Thriley (talk) 17:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron removed the paragraph sourced to the Washington Free Beacon and Jewish Insider about the identity of the account. Both sources are WP:NEWSORGS and are reliable sources. Further, it's not a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY to list the identity, which is of a public employee who has a very public profile and which is an "open secret on the Hill" per JInsider. Longhornsg (talk) 05:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

@Longhornsg: What? No, The Washington Free Beacon is not a reliable source per RSP. JInsider doesn't print the name, because it's a somewhat more reputable publication. It is a violation of WP:BLPPRIVACY to use anyone's full name unless they are widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. Both of those tests are emphatically not met here. Please revert your addition, as it is a cut-and-dry BLP violation. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 05:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. It's a bit surprising to see WFB as GUNREL given one of the cites at RSP is to a RSP about Newsmax, and the other two are light on participation. I'll start a new RFC that will hopefully receive more participation.  I'll remove the name here, but still think its worth including that JInsider had identified the account as a staffer in Congresswoman Lee's office. Longhornsg (talk) 05:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)