Talk:Mike Gabbard

message: Since 29 January, , , and , have successively gutted the article of all criticism, including a delete of large blocks of material with no discussion and no attempt to seek references or revise. This accounts for the article's current state, which is basically a pure puff piece for its subject. An attempt should be made to restore balance. -- IslandGyrl 05:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Restoring. Ashibaka tock 15:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical passages removed

message: In my last five postings, I have added a sentence related to Mike Gabbard’s announcement to run for State Senate.  I corrected an error, which stated that Mike Gabbard lost his race for Congress “overwhelmingly”. I also deleted the ridiculous statement that Hawaiian Toffee Treasures are “blessed”.  The external link to the “Anti-Mike Gabbard site was removed because it is defammatory and makes many unsubstantiated and false statements.  Ashibaka and IslandGyrl are obviously politically motivated to criticize and disparage Mike Gabbard during an election year.  This forum should be used as an encyclopedic reference and not for mud-slinging. - Bill F
:"…obviously politically motivated…" How about turning the passion down a notch, and read Wikipedia policies Assume good faith and No personal attacks? Most articles about political figures include criticism and controversy sections. If you find a passage is unfair, rewrite it to describe the criticism in an neutral way—that is, make it report what was said by whom without taking a position as to whether any claims by either side are true or false. Simply deleting material you don't like, on the other hand, is considered uncool.
:As for the link, I would think any reader would expect an encyclopedia to give "anti" sources as well as "pro". Let the reader hear all sides and decide for him/herself what's true. --IslandGyrl 01:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Politically Motivated 

message: The article has clearly been captured by pro-Gabbard forces determined to remove all criticism. He's a controversial politician, with a long history of anti-gay activism and a lot of skeletons in his closet (Chris Butler, for one). He is LOATHED by many people in the islands. None of that shows up in the article. Article should show both sides. Much work needed. Zora 23:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe we're still experiencing biased editing on this article, like the overall approach of this edit. Sumana Harihareswara 19:55, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politician vanity article 

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: I'm having trouble nailing down what this person actually did to oppose same-sex marriage in Hawaii, and the question is also coming up on the Tulsi Gabbard page, which I'm particularly working to improve right now.  Did Mike Gabbard help write or campaign for Hawaii Constitutional Amendment 2 (1998)? 
I've checked around the web (Civil Beat is unclear on this issue) and started checking the references for LGBT rights in Hawaii.  Can anyone give me some pointers and citations?  Thanks. Sumana Harihareswara 03:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What did he actually do to oppose same-sex marriage? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Mike Gabbard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.standupforamerica.net/about.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.standupforamerica.net/articles/christmas04.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://standupforamerica.net/?
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.standupforamerica.net/articles/rosemond.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article needs more sources. A number of facts are not cited to sources. In particular, a sentence on Gabbard's citizenship is unsourced. I found a source that supports the statement (http://www.samoanews.com/local-news/why-american-samoans-cant-run-office-or-even-vote), but am not certain whether it is reliable and do not have time to check into it so I have not added it. Thoughts, anyone? SunCrow (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs more sources

message: This page makes absolutely no mention of Mike Gabbard's socially conservative LGBTQ views, despite it being potentially the most notable aspect of his political career. He ran anti-gay political organizations, and anti-gay radio shows. The editing seems extremely suspect and biased. Political Vacuum (talk) 06:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential bias in writing of page 

message: I recently fixed a link that misleadingly suggested Christine Gralow had republished her blog posts at the Honolulu Advertiser.  In fact, her posts were republished on Hawaii Free Press.  Not sure this can be considered an RS... 🌿   SashiRolls  t ·   c 08:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In the only discussion at RSN, the replying editors found it unreliable. An article about the editor in Civil Beat makes me think it probably is not rs. Even if it were rs, it is unlikely that the reprinted blog would meet rs. TFD (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for looking into this at RS/N, TFD. 🌿   SashiRolls  t ·   c 02:55, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christine Gralow 

message: @, You inserted the following in this edit on 10/21:
From 1988 to 1992, Gabbard and his wife owned The Natural Deli, a vegetarian health food restaurant in Moiliili, Hawaii.  Gabbard closed the restaurant following picketing by activists following remarks by Gabbard on his self-funded radio show, "Let's Talk Straight Hawaii," on K-108, saying, "If [two applicants] were both the same, then I would take the one that is not homosexual." … 
The Tanahara article (from 2/10/92) says:
The activists started picket­ing after Gabbard stated on his KGU radio show that, if all else were equal, he would hire a heterosexual over a homosex­ual.
Tanahara did not indicate what, if any, question(s) Gabbard was asked, and did not quote Gabbard's statement.
The Ryan article (from one day later, 2/11/92) says:
Gabbard answered a call-in ques­tion on his radio show on whether or not, if all qualifications were equal, he would hire an openly homosexual or heterosexual person."
"I said ... I would hire the heterosexual," he said. "I've never broken any labor laws; I’ve never discriminated against anyone in hiring or firing practices. I’m not a hate monger."
Gabbard said a person's sexual preference is not part of his hiring practice. He believes he was "set up" by homosexual activists call­ing in and asking the same question several times.
The question was phrased "what if the person was openly homosexual," he said. "Gee, if he was openly heterosexual I might not hire him if I was worried he would keep hitting on my female employees."
Before the quoted material from Gabbard, the text by Ryan has a closing but not an opening quotation mark, so it's unclear what if any part of the question is quoted.
The Edgerton article (from three weeks later, 3/5/92) says:
Gabbard replied to a hypothetical question about hiring gays vs. straights thusly: "If the (two applicants) were both the same, then I would take the one that is not homosexual."
Edgerton did not quote the "hypothetical question" and it is unclear what the "two applicants" text inserted by Edgerton replaced in the quote attributed to Gabbard.
The text you included with an unverifiable direct quote attributed to Gabbard would not be allowed anywhere, much less in a BLP. Also, you say that Gabbard made "remarks", not that he answered a call-in question or questions. What the context was and what Gabbard actually said is not verifiable across the 3 cites. Given the lack of consistency in the references, and given that Gabbard's opposition to what he considered the "promotion" of homosexuality during that era three decades ago is already given DUE weight in the article, the text you inserted is not appropriate for inclusion.
Humanengr (talk) 07:33, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @, I changed the wording to take out the word "remarks."  Other than that, all of these RS paint the same picture around what happened.  With regard to WP:DUE, that's a distraction from what is at its core WP:NEUTRAL.  The discussion of the radio show and closure of the deli simply help explain how Gabbard went from being a health food store owner to a political activist and eventually a politician.Samp4ngeles (talk) 18:20, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Let's Talk Straight Hawaii" q&a 

message: My purpose here is, per WP:BLP, to
Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that:
1. is unsourced or poorly sourced;
2. is an original interpretation or analysis of a source, or a synthesis of sources (see No original research)
The allegation made above by  that Gabbard "was against hiring gays regardless of their marital status" would amount to violation of Hawaii labor laws. This is the editor's original inference, unsupported by cites: in fact, available information refutes this inference (see below). Adding this unsupported allegation, even on a talk page, is a violation of WP:BLP: 1) "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page"; 2) "BLP applies to all material about living persons anywhere on Wikipedia, including talk pages, edit summaries, user pages, images, categories, lists, article titles and drafts." 
The fact that the available evidence actually *goes against* the editor's allegation makes it more egregious than it would be otherwise, and allowing such degrades the quality of the discourse on the talk pages. 
1/29/1992 Yamaguchi article:
* Picketers Jim Grise and Sharyle Lyndon said they knew of no instance in which Gabbard had not hired applicants because they were gay.
2/10/1992 Tanahara article:
* Gabbard, who denied discrim­inating against anyone in his hiring or firing practices, said yesterday that if he had said on the show that he would hire the homosexual, he would have been discriminating against heterosexuals.
* When asked if he had ever hired a homosexual, Gabbard said he didn't know. “I never asked.” [emphasis added]
2/11/1992 Ryan article:
* I've never broken any labor laws; I’ve never discriminated against anyone in hiring or firing practices. I’m not a hate monger."
* Gabbard said a person's sexual preference is not part of his hiring practice. He believes he was “set-up" by homosexual activists call­ing in and asking the same question several times.
* The question was phrased “what if the person was openly homosexual," he said. “Gee, if he was openly heterosexual I might not hire him if I was worried he would keep hitting on my female employees."
* Woods and another gay rights activist, Sharyle Lyndon, don’t know of anyone not hired by Gab­bard because they were gay …
There is no evidence that Gabbard ever asked about sexual orientation or discriminated. The picketers say they "don’t know of anyone not hired by Gab­bard because they were gay". If any edits are to be made to this locked article, these facts should be included for WP:NPOV. Humanengr (talk) 05:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the article has been full-protected. Insofar as there isn't much breaking news on either Mike Gabbard or the SIF, this is a potential solution.  A better one would be administrator attention to the root problem. 🌿   SashiRolls  t ·   c 08:40, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

text: There has been no proposal to insert this language in the article itself, so Humanengr is wasting a lot of time here.  With regard to the underlying question of Gabbard's view on hiring gays (whether it was something he would not have done or whether it was something he thought others should not have done), that stemmed from a comment he made on his radio show, which was broadly consistent with all of his other rhetoric on LGBT rights.  It is well documented that   Humanengr's argumentation above relies almost solely on statements attributed Mike Gabbard himself, which can in no way be assumed to be WP:NPOV. --Samp4ngeles (talk) 16:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper original allegation by editor against Gabbard 

message: 2 of the 3 citations for his being a "socially conservative Catholic" are his own website and washington examiner - not reliable sources.
Other sources suggest he was an eccentric who was/is a member of a South Asian, Krishna influenced religious cult who raised all of his children away from his own attested faith.
Skepticism of subject's own claims should be used in favor of more reliable sources
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/tulsi-gabbard-2020-presidential-campaign.html
TuffStuffMcG (talk) 18:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socially Conservative Catholic