Talk:Kathy Shaidle

message: This is just a collection of stuff which might be useful in this article, in no particular order.
Interview at FrontPage, Nov 2008. Excerpt(s):
I grew up below the poverty [line.] ... I was the first person in my family to finish high school. I grew up around people who talk to each other in the flesh the way all these alleged "neo Nazis" did on the internet. ... [T]he proles must remain silent as the great enlightened liberal Elite rule the nation. ... I find it fascinating that Steyn's accusers were a university professor and a group of young law school grads, and Steyn himself dropped out of high school at age 16. When you read the anti-free speech, pro-HRC argumentation in Canada, you don't have to scratch the surface too much to reveal lots of class snobbery. So much for egalitarian Canada.
5FoF, 2008-06-19 Ms Shaidle and Arnie Lemaire were married in June 2008.
Steyn on the LFP hit piece
5FoF, 2009-01-30 Shaidle supports Warren Kinsella against "the Professional Ethnic Victimhood Police". Excerpt:
Look, every day on my blog, I insult groups of every ethnicity. Why? Well, because it's funny, dammit. I grew up watching Don Rickles. ... But also because I don't accept the notion of Group Insult.
Political correctness is a threat to national security, not to mention an encroachment on our ordinary lives, where we feel inclined to whisper constantly like we're living in the Soviet Union. Political correctness must be undermined at every opportunity if we wish to survive.
5FoF, 2009-03-23: "'Ranson note racism' targets moderate, conservative Canadian Muslim"
I hope to have time to expand the article in the next few weeks. CWC 12:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps these sources would be appropriate in the controversy section to provide balance and context? AnnieHall (talk) 00:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working notes, March 2009 

message: I hesitate to take this drastic step, but, really, as currently written up, this section falls short of WP standards on several points:
* I doubt that the event (the controversy around Shaidle's London, Ontario appearance) is really notable, in the sense that it is a significant part of her biography, or something that someone will want to know about in the future.
* On the contrary, it strikes me as a fairly transparent pretext for working some unflattering selective quotes and paraphrases into the article - something several editors have been trying to do for months, long before the London controversy.
* Shaidle, Mark Steyn, and other commentators have criticized similar attacks on Shaidle as "ransom note" journalism - i.e., piecing together selective quotes and (arguably inaccurate) paraphrases into polemical attacks. If there is any substance to Steyn et al's complaint, these attacks may be defamatory, and so reproducing them verbatim in WP runs contrary to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Libel. Note that as editors we are in no position to debate issues of libel in this case, except to note that selective quotes and paraphrases amounting to misrepresentation may indeed be libellous.
* The WP policy on possible libel is not to debate, or to flag, but to cut. Please do not reinstate the Richmond or Faber quotes without a discussion leading to consensus.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.187.193 (talk) 05:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "News reporting is distinct from opinion pieces. Opinion pieces are only reliable for statements as to the opinion of their authors, not for statements of fact, and should be attributed in-text."
Despite all this, I do believe that some of the controversies around Shaidle could be written up in a Wikipediable fashion.
Cheers, Chris B. (not Chittleborough) 05:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Commenting in response to the recent reverting that has been happening: I also would urge caution (from the WP:BLP policy perspective) about introducing so much negative material from a single source (one article in the London Free Press). I think the sentence Her views on Islam, political correctness, freedom of speech, and other issues have ignited controversy is a fair summary. It's risky to reproduce the bulk of the Free Press article. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 01:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove "Controversy" section - doubtful notability, pushes a POV, risks libel, and relies on a questionable source 

message: I think it is clear that this person is not notable in any way.  I am calling for the Wiki editors to delete the article entirely. It should never have been put up. 23.242.139.139 (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The wiki editors moved to keep it and the explanation is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kathy_Shaidl
Apparently losing at the GG awards makers you a valid  candidate .24.24.142.155 (talk) 22:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move for deletion.