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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
@JesseRafe: Please explain to a newbie how literal front page news is "not news"? 68.173.57.123 (talk) 21:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is news, this is not news, it's an encyclopedia. More info at WP:NOTNEWS. JesseRafe (talk) 12:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
He's an apparatchik that nobody would have heard of if not for the litigation that has resulted from his racist left-wing agenda. He hates Asians for their success, and took steps to screw them over by denying them places that they earned in selective schools .2601:647:4F00:7D:34F1:B1AE:3186:FF6A (talk) 14:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@68.173.57.123: One thing to keep in mind Re: WP:NOTNEWS is that Wikipedia encourages adding many forms of information in the news, but not all forms of the news should be included. Typically "routine coverage" (expected day-to-day events), tabloid coverage, and minor trivia are not to be included, while major developments are to be included. Please consult the section for further information. Since it's common for school districts to get lawsuits, I would wait and see on the lawsuit to see how it progresses.
@JesseRafe: I reviewed the edit here and edit here and I think the letter to the super may in fact be significant news which can be included in the article. It is a big deal when the city council calls for the superintendent's firing. This is the kind of news that Wikipedia wants! As for the lawsuit, I'm not sure yet. It's something that we can wait and see on. I do think in the future that when you introduce NOTNews to inexperienced editors, explain how the guideline distinguishes, and tell them how they can wait and see on whether to include/not include a news development.
As a point of order, the City Council as a deliberative and legislative body did not call for the chancellor's firing. It read to me as political theater and was being added to the article in a partisan manner. There has been no further updates in this "cause" since the minor story a few weeks ago. It could be mentioned, though, but in more neutral terms than what was originally written. As to your last point, I could, but there's no way to know who is and isn't new, especially when this was just a few hours after a prior edit was made to weasel/embellish a potentially embarrassing fact. I'll make a point to explain more detailed in edit summaries going forward. Thanks, JesseRafe (talk) 20:20, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Yes, it's a good point that city council as a whole/as a body did not, just nine individual members (I wish I could edit the edit summaries, but alas). Re: new users, one is generally supposed to assume that a person with few edits is a new user, but there are editing behaviors that can be used to determine if they're not new... if they seem to know a lot of Wikipedia policies off the bat and/or edit the same set of articles a previous user had. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Re: 23 members supporting him, that's a great edit, and that's the best way to respond to incomplete details; having this provides a sense of how much support Carranza has on the NYC city council. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
