Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2023
Just wanted to add the Category:American TikTokers to her page, since she's active on TikTok. GeekfromHell (talk) 07:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ❌ That category is for people whose primary notability is through their TikTok channels, not every person who posts on TikTok (which would be a ridiculous amount if you think about it). Black Kite (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Palestine
Ocasio-Cortez's controversial and continuous support for Palestine in regards to the Palestine–Israel conflict should most certainly be noted. Felixsj (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It's already mentioned. But support for Palestine is not equivalent to support for Hamas or terrorism. So I don't see that anything new is required. Black Kite (talk) 19:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * These comments by Ocasio-Cortez are relevant: and . The source is Politico. Cullen328 (talk) 08:04, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

WP:LEAD
"She was previously an activist". What does this mean/refer to? I find nothing on it in the body of the article. Lead already states "politician and activist". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I think it's referring to:
 * After the general election, she traveled across America by car, visiting places such as Flint, Michigan, and Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota, and speaking to people affected by the Flint water crisis and the Dakota Access Pipeline.
 * In the source itself:
 * An activist she knew at Standing Rock, where indigenous activists were leading a demonstration against the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, told her the camp could use more women. So the then-27-year-old Ocasio-Cortez and two friends set up a GoFundMe page, loaded up a car full of supplies, and set out for South Dakota.
 * Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 08:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that is something. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:33, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

No controversy paragraph?????
How can an elected office like this not have controversy paragraph, if that isn't bias I don't know what is... There no mention of the house investigation,https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2022/12/09/checks--imbalances-house-ethics-panel-investigates-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-fines-madison-cawthorn/?sh=7bace3c597b6 No mention of campaign contributions from G,Soros.... It pages like this that is allowing wiki credibility ranking to be damaged. 2600:4040:9969:6200:C11F:616B:7119:752 (talk) 18:31, 18 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Controversy sections tends to become shit-magnets, so separate sections should if possible be avoided, more at WP:CRIT. Finding paragraphs with controversy in them is not hard if you read the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-republicans-spotlight-aoc-pacs-contributions-vulnerable-house-democrats-2021-04-19/

https://apnews.com/article/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-7fe67c6bca345aed240897732caedee2
 * See WP:CONTROVERSYSECTION. Dedicating a section or paragraph to "controversies" is a bad idea. How is a campaign contribution from George Soros controversial? I believe consensus is against including ethics investigations, just conclusions. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Discussion of support and opposition on Pay raises for Congress
@Ruhrob, you asked why the sentence pertaining to Kevin McCarthy is related to the topic. It is related because it gives context there is some opposite party support for her position as well as same party opposition for her position. By removing the supporting section and leaving the opposing section, it creates a false balance. Ward20 (talk) 19:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

"The last time the House censured a lawmaker" line
The final sentence of the section "Online harassment from Paul Gosar" states:

> The last time the House censured a lawmaker was in 2010.

However now that Rashida Tlaib has been censured in 2023, this statement is out of date. I was thinking about changing it to "The previous time [...]" and perhaps that would merit a citation to Tlaib's censure? Generally I would advocate for avoiding terminology like this that can become out of date.

Perhaps the entire sentence can be removed, it feels like it is adding spin by emphasizing the infrequent rate of censures in the House of Representatives. Razziabuissa (talk) 14:02, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Revert
Hello, what is the reason for your revert here? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez&diff=prev&oldid=1213895046 FMSky (talk) 22:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

"Left-wing"
Are phrases like "left wing" normally included in lead sentences of articles about members of Congress? It's not in, for example, Bernie Sanders' article. Trivialist (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, we also include it in basically every right-leaning person's biography --FMSky (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that that's true. We include it on a few firebrands but not on all of them (for example, it's absent from Donald Trump. I noticed that when you added it you compared her to Marjorie Taylor Greene, but I'm not sure they're comparable in terms of the coverage she received. In any case, this gets to the main issue, which is that we shouldn't decide things like this based on WP:FALSEBALANCE but based on what the sources say in each case - is AOC typically referred to as left-wing in coverage? --Aquillion (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez#Political_positions --FMSky (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sourcing there isn't great for putting this in the lead. Almost everything in the "far-left" citation bundle is brief attributed quotes or things that don't actually describe her personally as far-left; and it also labels her as progressive, with no clear explanation for why you went with "left-wing". And of course the rest of the section goes into a lot more detail, with more in-depth sources that generally don't use those terms. Glancing over the history, you've been pretty aggressive about reverting this back into the lead every time it's removed, given that it hasn't really been discussed and reflects only a single recently-added line in the body. In fact, the entire sentence you added there is weird - it pulls a bunch of brief mentions out of context to provide a list of terms that aren't really given much focus in any one piece of coverage, when we already had a much more in-depth discussion of her politics. If you compare her to MTG (the article that seems to have prompted this on your end, though, I'll reiterate, that's really WP:FALSEBALANCE), there's repeated references throughout the article with much more in-depth sourcing; and it's much easier to find in-depth sources discussing MTG's connection the far-right in general and discussing it in ways that make it central to her notability. --Aquillion (talk) 19:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Shes the definition of a leftist, see for example here: https://www.nydailynews.com/2019/07/05/joe-biden-dismisses-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-as-brilliant-but-too-far-left/
 * Or here "the famous face of the American far left" https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/06/01/politics-in-the-bronx-borough-is-a-world-away-from-manhattan-and-trump-s-legal-troubles_6673408_4.html
 * "the most prominent voice of the far-left "Squad"" https://thehill.com/homenews/house/594183-ocasio-cortez-laments-sh-show-of-congress/
 * If you dont know her please sit this one out -FMSky (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)