User talk:Marquardtika: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tag: Reverted
Line 720: Line 720:


:I do have access to the article, thanks, which is why I can see that the content you added is not fully supported by the source. I signed up for a user account and was able to see it. First off, it's editorializing to say "controversy" when the source doesn't use that word. See also [[WP:CSECTION]]. The article says "The Rio Grande Foundation, an Albuquerque-based free-market think tank with nonprofit status, was thrust into the race after the McCutcheon campaign cited its podcast, called Tipping Point NM, on the website — sanctuaryscott.com — branding Scott a liberal." It goes on to say "Paul Gessing, the foundation's president, described the website as 'very aggressive' and said it cited the nonprofit think tank to attack Scott. Basically, I wrote an op-ed ... saying that by our metrics, Representative Scott is a conservative." The article also says "Scott has consistently ranked among the most conservative members of the state House of Representatives in the Rio Grande Foundation's so-called Freedom Index system." And then "The op-ed, published in the Hobbs News-Sun, triggered a complaint against the nonprofit.The complaint, filed with the New Mexico Department of Justice by Gina George of Las Cruces, contends Gessing 'appeared to have endorsed a political candidate' in possible violation of the stipulations set by the Internal Revenue Service for 501©(3) organizations." Nothing appears to have come from this complaint. Who is Gina George? Why should we care that she filed a complaint that resulted in nothing? This whole thing seems like a case of [[WP:NOTNEWS]]. If something comes of this brouhaha it could be worth including. But it looks to me like the Rio Grande Foundation is tangentially related to a Republican primary battle. [[User:Marquardtika|Marquardtika]] ([[User talk:Marquardtika#top|talk]])
:I do have access to the article, thanks, which is why I can see that the content you added is not fully supported by the source. I signed up for a user account and was able to see it. First off, it's editorializing to say "controversy" when the source doesn't use that word. See also [[WP:CSECTION]]. The article says "The Rio Grande Foundation, an Albuquerque-based free-market think tank with nonprofit status, was thrust into the race after the McCutcheon campaign cited its podcast, called Tipping Point NM, on the website — sanctuaryscott.com — branding Scott a liberal." It goes on to say "Paul Gessing, the foundation's president, described the website as 'very aggressive' and said it cited the nonprofit think tank to attack Scott. Basically, I wrote an op-ed ... saying that by our metrics, Representative Scott is a conservative." The article also says "Scott has consistently ranked among the most conservative members of the state House of Representatives in the Rio Grande Foundation's so-called Freedom Index system." And then "The op-ed, published in the Hobbs News-Sun, triggered a complaint against the nonprofit.The complaint, filed with the New Mexico Department of Justice by Gina George of Las Cruces, contends Gessing 'appeared to have endorsed a political candidate' in possible violation of the stipulations set by the Internal Revenue Service for 501©(3) organizations." Nothing appears to have come from this complaint. Who is Gina George? Why should we care that she filed a complaint that resulted in nothing? This whole thing seems like a case of [[WP:NOTNEWS]]. If something comes of this brouhaha it could be worth including. But it looks to me like the Rio Grande Foundation is tangentially related to a Republican primary battle. [[User:Marquardtika|Marquardtika]] ([[User talk:Marquardtika#top|talk]])

==Partial block==
<div class="user-block uw-pblock" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">[[File:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock]]<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''[[WP:Partial blocks|blocked]]''' from editing '''[[Ginni Thomas]]''' for a period of '''one month''' for [[WP:EW|edit warring]]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to [[WP:Five pillars|make useful contributions]]. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's [[WP:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]], then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx|" code. --><code><nowiki>{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}</nowiki></code>. &nbsp;[[User:El_C|El_C]] 05:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)</div></div><!-- Template:uw-pblock -->

Revision as of 05:23, 2 May 2024

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red March 2023

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine!
    Include something to keep people reading.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Thanks for your work on the Issue One page

Hi Marquardtika, I just wanted to say a quick thank you for your edits to the Issue One article earlier this week. I have a COI as I work for Issue One, but I've been hoping an uninvolved editor like yourself might take a look at the proposed edits I've posted on the Issue One Talk page. If you're able to continue making changes as you see fit, I would really appreciate it. I've proposed edits to the History and Organization sections. Thank you again! AR at Issue One (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red April 2023

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red May 2023

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Nomination of Sabato's Crystal Ball for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sabato's Crystal Ball is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabato's Crystal Ball until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

voorts (talk/contributions) 02:19, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red July 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mónica Ramírez Almadani moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mónica Ramírez Almadani. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Let'srun (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

Women in Red 8th Anniversary
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Rebecca C. Lutzko moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Rebecca C. Lutzko. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Let'srun (talk) 15:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red August 2023

Women in Red August 2023, Vol 9, Iss 8, Nos 251, 252, 277, 278, 279, 280


Online events:

See also:

  • Wikimania 2023 will be held in Singapore, 16–19 August, and will be facilitated by the
    affiliates in the ESEAP (East/South East/Asia/Pacific) region.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As to Elissa Slotkin govtrack record

I saw you deleted it because there was no other coverages of it. Although it do have WP:OR problem if no other sources covered it, I find it was covered by two other sources 1: https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2020/09/22/elissa-slotkin-paul-junge-fact-check/5854179002/ from Detroit Free Press 2: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/21/paul-junge/fact-checking-rep-elissa-slotkins-record-bipartisa/#sources from FactCheck.org Do you think those two sources give it enough notability to be added back? If you think so, may I ask you to add it back since it is fully protected. 24.227.255.90 (talk) 22:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Marquardtika and 24.227.255.90: I replied regarding this at Talk:Elissa Slotkin which I think could use your input. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk)

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023 at Women in Red

Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283


Online events:

Tip of the month:

  • The books she wrote might be notable, too; learn 5 quick tips about about book articles.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Victuallers (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red October 2023

Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red - November 2023

Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Information icon Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! MrFlyingPies23 (talk) 21:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Manchin MrFlyingPies23 (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. I made a minor typographical edit to Joe Manchin and marked it as minor. Per the link you included above, 92.1% of my major edits have a summary. Looks like an A average! Marquardtika (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. You have a point. But if you don't provide an edit summary to any edit it's your fault if it gets reverted. It can be confusing to new Wikipedians. Everyone can revert an edit if it does not have an edit summary. Most of your edits have an edit summary, but the edit on Joe Manchin did not have an edit summary. As small and minor as the edit is, it is important to always provide an edit summary, H:FIES. Thank You. MrFlyingPies23 (Talk?) | (Contrib) 22:48, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of edits on Russell J. Rickford

Hey there. I just wanted to comment on your reversion of an edit on the Russell J. Rickford article. I'm assuming you made the same mistake as me and thought "that's an outlandish claim". However, in this case the subject of the article actually did call the Hamas attack "exhilarating". I'm going to go through the article and make sure it stands up to scrutiny now, but I just wanted to leave a comment about using appropriate edit warnings when reverting content like that. Otherwise it just incites the person to come back and edit the page again, making the same mistake.

Side note in case you weren't aware of it, that article was eligible for WP:ARBECR as a topic related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. It has now been protected. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 04:07, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red December 2023

Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David S. Leibowitz

Hello. I noticed one of my edits for David S. Leibowitz was reverted by yourself. The reason put was “socking”. Can you explain the revert please? Thank you for your time


202zone (talk) 18:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are quite clearly a sock of of MIAJudges. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MIAJudges. Marquardtika (talk) 19:32, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Federal Circuit is a proper noun

The Federal Circuit is the name of a specific court, like the First Circuit or the District of Columbia Circuit, and is therefore a proper noun and always capitalized. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: Ah, my bad! Thanks for the note. Marquardtika (talk) 21:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thumbs up icon. BD2412 T 21:23, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red January 2024

Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296


Online events:

Announcement

  • In 2024 Women in Red also has a one biography a week challenge as part
    of the #1day1woman initiative!

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Christopher Caldwell (government official) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christopher Caldwell (government official) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Caldwell (government official) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red February 2024

Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298


Online events:

Announcement

  • Please let other wikiprojects know about our February Black women event.

Tip of the month:

  • AllAfrica can now be searched on the ProQuest tab at the WP Library.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join New pages patrol

Hello Marquardtika!

  • The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
  • We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
  • Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
  • If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red March 2024

Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301


Online events:

Announcements

Tip of the month:

  • When creating a new article, check various spellings, including birth name, married names
    and pseudonyms, to be sure an article doesn't already exist.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red April 2024

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304


Online events:

Announcements

  • The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Invitation to the RfC on the talk page of Elissa Slotkin

Recently there has been a new RfC on the talk page of Elissa Slotkin aiming at resolving a dispute here, but it does not attract enough engagement to form a consensus, Since you have edited it recently, could you please come here to help to form a consensus? 128.194.2.73 (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red May 2024

Women in Red | May 2024, Volume 10, Issue 5, Numbers 293, 294, 305, 306, 307


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

  • Use open-access references wherever possible, but a paywalled reliable source
    is better than none, particularly for biographies of living people.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Rio Grande Foundation edits

Edits to the Rio Grande Foundation were reverted. Reason cited was "not an accurate summary of source."

Please see the full cited source article. The full article from The Santa Fe New Mexican is not available unless user is subscribed. [1]

Edit was: "In 2024, Rio Grande Foundation President Paul Gessing engaged the Foundation in the controversy surrounding a partisan primary election. Gessing authored an op-ed that defended Representative Larry Scott's conservative record against attacks from his opponent, Steve McCutcheon. This action led to a formal complaint alleging that Gessing's public comments could be seen as a partisan endorsement, potentially violating the nonpartisan status required of 501(c)(3) organizations." Pbrenner91 (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do have access to the article, thanks, which is why I can see that the content you added is not fully supported by the source. I signed up for a user account and was able to see it. First off, it's editorializing to say "controversy" when the source doesn't use that word. See also WP:CSECTION. The article says "The Rio Grande Foundation, an Albuquerque-based free-market think tank with nonprofit status, was thrust into the race after the McCutcheon campaign cited its podcast, called Tipping Point NM, on the website — sanctuaryscott.com — branding Scott a liberal." It goes on to say "Paul Gessing, the foundation's president, described the website as 'very aggressive' and said it cited the nonprofit think tank to attack Scott. Basically, I wrote an op-ed ... saying that by our metrics, Representative Scott is a conservative." The article also says "Scott has consistently ranked among the most conservative members of the state House of Representatives in the Rio Grande Foundation's so-called Freedom Index system." And then "The op-ed, published in the Hobbs News-Sun, triggered a complaint against the nonprofit.The complaint, filed with the New Mexico Department of Justice by Gina George of Las Cruces, contends Gessing 'appeared to have endorsed a political candidate' in possible violation of the stipulations set by the Internal Revenue Service for 501©(3) organizations." Nothing appears to have come from this complaint. Who is Gina George? Why should we care that she filed a complaint that resulted in nothing? This whole thing seems like a case of WP:NOTNEWS. If something comes of this brouhaha it could be worth including. But it looks to me like the Rio Grande Foundation is tangentially related to a Republican primary battle. Marquardtika (talk)

Partial block

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing Ginni Thomas for a period of one month for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  El_C 05:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Marquardtika&oldid=1221822559"