Talk:Asha Rangappa

Comment
Nothing against Ms. Rangappa, but this is a personal webpage, not an encyclopedic entry. 98.229.4.47 (talk) 00:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)burgo
 * Agreed. Rewrote in accordance to our guidelines.--Biografer (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A note on the article says not to add her birth date and refers here to Talk. However, there's no discussion existing here. Wikipedia is not censored, and the information is easily available from many sources, so I've added it. Activist (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I note also that the article's subject, a very public person, threatened to retaliate against anyone who publicized information about her family. There's considerable info about her, including a casual photo of her and her ex-husband, that pops up when her name is put in a browser:
 * "She further voiced her amazement and frustrations from her 'unhinged followers digging up her information' on her ex-husband and other members of his family on 27 May 2018. "Enough is Enough: Asha expresses her views to her past being discussed (Photo: Asha Rangappa's Twitter)" "'Let me make one thing clear -- Do not ever -- and I mean EVER--comment on my children. I take that to be a threat and I promise you I will use every legal means at my disposal to find out who you are. This is a public forum and if you want to attack me, fine. Not my kids. Got it?'" I actually included the well-publicized birth month, but I declined to post the birth date of her son.
 * I'm not sure how she can construe repeating readily available public information as an "attack." I don't post on Twitter, and I'm not a "follower, " just another of the million-plus Wikipedia editors, so perhaps she won't define me as "unhinged." Since her son's name is not critical to her article, as a courtesy, I'll delete that as well as his birth month. I had never heard of her before yesterday, when I read her very speculative allegation that Jeffrey Epstein's apparent suicide was facilitated by his supposed bribing of the correctional staff at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, New York. That seemed an odd statement coming from an attorney. Activist (talk) 11:08, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Activist, India Abroad probably isn't a reliable enough source for including dob of blp. I don't see it in perennial sources or in any discussions at rsn. Let's discuss before adding back. --valereee (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, Valereee. The info in the article seemed pretty detailed and reliable to me. The year of birth was already in the WP article. I was finding info as detailed as the birth weight and length of her boy. I know you're interested in the article. I would suggest that you search for a source for the same info that would satisfy you. I was only drawn to find out anything about her after she was quoted as making what I thought was an extremely unlawyerlike comment about MCC personnel taking bribes. Thanks very much. I'm so busy I can't see straight. Activist (talk) 22:10, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I finally got a few minutes to spare. I found lots of mentions from many sources with the same DOB, but none that you might find a RSS. (Since the NYT let Judith Miller repeatedly write all that obvious crap about Saddam's "WMDs," I take them with a grain of salt.), and since I haven't heard back from you, I checked the Instagram account she mentions (first time I've ever looked at one). There's a photo of her in a stars and stripes bikini, comments by her friends (in 2016) saying "Donald" might find her hot. Checked Facebook for birthday photos. Nada, no cakes, no silly hats and balloons, although there was a photo of her healthy, happy kids at 9 and 6 y/o. Checked Twitter: Bingo!

Daniel M. Gold @unrealDMGold · Nov 15, 2018 Replying to @AshaRangappa_ Happy birthday, Asha Rangappa!

paul @paul83421150 · Nov 15, 2018 Replying to @AshaRangappa_ and @CIAspygirl Asha Rangappa!I could use some indictments too — it’s my birthday!🎊🎁🎉 paul,!!! !!!!!!! Asha Rangappa! my birthday!🎊🎁🎉 paul,TV,fryday!M

So how's that? Should we take her word for it, that it's her actual birthday? I'm restoring it. I'm outta here. I have much more important things piling up on my desk and Wikipedia isn't anywhere near the top of my list. P.S. I did find a nice photo of her with Robert Mueller at her FBI graduation from Quantico training. It's almost certainly public domain, but I didn't post it. I found another of her with Bill Clinton, appearing starstruck, but unlikely public domain. Today she's still weaving dubious tales of Epstein death "conspiracies" in the absence of evidence (i.e., her rejecting the story, of which I hadn't heard, about graveyard shift "sleeping guards" whom we know were working 70-hour weeks). I also saw where she said, two years ago, that the Mueller Special Counsel investigation was "melting down," if I recall correctly. I didn't post that either. Activist (talk) 07:41, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * , a twitter mention by her would be okay, can you provide a link so we can insert the source?
 * I had pasted the whole damn series of posts in which she thanked her Twitter friends for their birthday greetings to her right here. I just went back to Twitter, due to your request, though I thought it was excessive, and put "Asha Rangappa" and "birthday in the internal browser box, and it came right back up. I didn't even know the box existed until now, and I had previously gone tediously through her posts starting with her last birthday until I found it. So here's what the URL was: https://(twitter.com)/search?q=%22asha%20rangappa%22%20birthday&src=recent_search_click You could have done that yourself. I just tried to post it, at your request, and WP informed me that the site was on the WP blacklist. I adapted it so you read it and hopefully WP won't reject its incorporation here. Activist (talk) 11:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * What does her birthdate have to do with photos of her and Epstein/special counsel comments? If those are covered in reliable sources at a length that seems to indicate noteworthiness, we can cover them, of course, and ditto any photos that are in public domain. I'm not sure what point you're making that you didn't add them, but it's clear you're making some point. Is there a problem? --valereee (talk) 10:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I mentioned her disparagement of the Mueller investigation, two years ago, only because I thought it was both odd and precipitous. I don't care if it's in the article or not. I don't care if a public domain photo is in the article or not, though she likes to see her picture and she's very photogenic. She's in Italy now, sending more colorful photos of herself. But please, think about this. Don't ask me for anything else. I don't have time for it. What are you thinking about? 11:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Not pinging you, as you've asked me not to ask you for anything, but you did ask me what I was thinking about, so here's what I am thinking: I didn't ask you to add the birthdate in. In general I think a birth year is sufficient for BLPs and would never myself go hunting for an exact birth date. You added the birth date. I pointed out that without a RS, we couldn't use it. You said it was on twitter. I accepted that but added that we needed to source the assertion with an inline citation to that tweet. Now you're saying I should have gone to find a source for the assertion you want to add and that I don't even think is necessary? I am bemused. At this point, we have a BLP with an unsourced DOB. The link you provided above is dead; perhaps the article subject is reading this and, realizing she's put private info out there that she doesn't want in the article about her, has removed those twedets. I am removing the day/month again, since this is a blp privacy issue and we still do not have a source and since you seem to be indicating you are done talking here. Please if you want to re-add it, let's discuss further. --valereee (talk) 12:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I first found her birthdate by simply putting her name and the word "birthday" into my browser. I got lots of hits. I didn't see any that would satisfy your demand for a RSS. I went back and put her name and her actual birthday, "November 15, 1974," into my browswer and found many more confirmations of the date. I also put her name and 11/15/74 into found more confirmations of the birthdate in question, but not any that you would accept as an RSS. I put 1974-11-15 in the browser and found still more confirmations, but again not meeting your criteria. Then I found the info by scrolling down through the messages she herself posted on Twitter until I found her confirmation of her own birthday. Then I pasted those Twitter messages written by Asha Rangapappa and her Twitter followers right here on Talk. That wasn't good enough for you, either. You wanted a URL. So I went back, discovered that a viewer can simply put the words "Asha Rangapappa" and "birthday" into the Twitter internal browser box and it will take them directly to the message in question. I got the URL that went directly to the Twitter messages but Wikipedia blocked them as "blacklisted site." So apparently Wikipedia blocks any Twitter URLs. So I wrote to you that I'd done something to the URL to see if it would post here. What I did was put the actual word "twitter" into parentheses. That did work, it wasn't blocked, so you could read it. You're not a stupid person. You must know that there are no URLs which have parentheses in them. The twitter feed confirmed what I'd found in those many sources that you would not accept as reliable. She thanked her two followers who may be actual personal friends for their birthday wishes to her. If you want to see it before your very eyes, exactly the same messages as I'd already posted here, on the Twitter site itself, if you're a "Doubting Thomas," just take the parentheses out of the URL on your own PC or laptop or whatever you're using, and you will look at what she exactly actually wrote, what I'd copied and pasted. You could also search for her name and the word "Twitter" and go to the internal browser that pops up. When I went back to the story you had changed a few words in the article which made it better and I thanked you for it. At that point I had certainly spent more than an hour trying to satisfy your demands. Her birthday isn't a military secret, but I found that Hampton, Virginia doesn't post birth records on the city's web feed, and I expect that would be a primary source if it had. I don't know if the local paper, whatever that is, had a birth announcement in it when she was born. I don't have a couple more hours to spare on this. The article should have her actual birth date, just like every other article on Wikipedia where that data is available, but you've insisted on removing it repeatedly. I don't expect that I'll find a photo of her blowing out the candles on her own birthday cake that I could count and if I did, I don't know if you would find even that to be sufficient. I'm going to put it back once more and hope you leave it there, as you can look at her actual Twitter messages, but I realize even that may not satisfy you because of something I'm absolutely unable to fathom, whatever it is. I've tried very hard to accommodate your insistence. I give up. Activist (talk) 18:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * lol you clearly aren't giving up, or at least not until you've gotten your way, and you're now into edit warring. There are clearly no reliable sources out there widely publishing this info, which is required for BLP dob per WP:DOB. The fact she may have mentioned her birthday on twitter once is not sufficient. I am not going to revert this, as I don't want to edit war myself, but I believe it's a BLP privacy violation. Please revert yourself. --valereee (talk) 17:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW, here's what I can find she tweeted on Nov 15 of last year: https://   twitter   .   com    /search?q=(from%3Aasharangappa_)%20until%3A2018-11-16%20since%3A2018-11-15&src=typed_query (close gaps to use url)


 * She apparently did not tweet about her birthday? I'm thinking the mentions you found were perhaps other people wishing her a happy birthday, but that doesn't mean she wants it out there. --valereee (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * What you imagine is no longer relevant. You've submitted this to the BLP noticeboard. Obviously, you and I are not going to resolve this. She in fact wrote:  "it’s my birthday!🎊🎁🎉 paul,!!! !!!!!!! Asha Rangappa! my birthday!🎊🎁🎉 What she does or does not want out there is not relevant to the article. She (or anyone) doesn't get to write or edit an article about herself. I removed the name of her son, and his birthday, and didn't post the name of her daughter, because she possibly didn't want it "out there." I didn't have to do that, but since it wasn't particularly relevant, I deleted it. You are the person who has been edit warring about this, since March!, long before I got here. Activist (talk) 23:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I would have removed the names and birth dates of minor children as a matter of course, whether or not the article subject expressed an opinion about her minor children being identified. Minor children should never be identified here. --valereee (talk) 01:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Valereee about the children, unless they are notable individuals themselves, which they are not for this subject. I also agree that WP:DOB has not been satisfied for the article subject's birth date. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 01:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Conspiracy theorizing
This is directly from the source, Asha Rangappa writing: "I know there are a lot of conspiracy theories being flung about.  I think the simplest explanation is that he paid guards $$$ (which he had done before in FL) to look the other way, knowing that he was basically guaranteed to be spending the rest of his life in prison." (It's from her Twitter account, dated 8/11 and the time being 11:25 a.m.) The reporters updated it on August 11, but kept the same title, the same URL, the same date, etc. The original quote was modified slightly, but how can it be, "Not in source?" Activist (talk) 12:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I did not see the Twitter content from Rangappa because it was contained in an image file, unlike the other tweets in the article. The content is WP:UNDUE and a clear WP:BLP violation. 14:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The article's subject's conspiracy theorizing is neither UNDUE nor BLP violative. Should not be deleted again without reference to the specific reason for a contention that either or both criteria for deletion were met, rather than a general reference to the Wikipedia policies. Were she not an attorney, and a regularly appearing pundit regarding legal matters, her "theorizing" (quoting which Valereee edited, while deleting my original paraphrasing) is notable as a departure from the legal profession's norms. That quote was widely disseminated by numerous RSS at the time she made it. Activist (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I already responded to you above. If you are unable to keep track of the conversations, then do a better job at keeping your comments in one section. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that I moved your comment and my response to this section. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Could you be more precise about what you feel are both UNDUE and any BLP violation in my Asha Rangappa edits to which you objected? I've read them after reading your objections and I can't find any. The subject presents herself as possessing expertise by virtue of being an ex-FBI agent (though her career was rather brief) and as a legal expert. However, she did not base her conspiratorial opinion on any facts to be found anywhere in evidence. The notion guards, plural, somehow conspired between themselves and with Epstein and actually took money, to enable him to kill himself after he somehow paid them off, in order to take advantage of such an opportunity, stretches far beyond the bounds of reason, in my opinion. It certainly isn't remotely "the simplest explanation," and wasn't shared by anyone else that I've been able to discover, and it certainly hasn't been found to be legitimate in the inquiries into his death so far. So if she imagines some remarkable scenario for this to be the case and broadcasts that conclusion widely to the media and her 390K Twitter followers, that would seem to reflect on what she claims to be her expertise, and be a legitimate inclusion into the article. It's not Alex Jones-level hypothesizing, but notable all the same, I'd think. I wonder if she has ever tried a criminal case or even testified in one? Also, "V" has accused me of edit warring but in fact she or he had reverted the edits of numerous other WP editors, i.e., on March 19th, April 15th, August 14th, August 15th. She or he also rejected "India Abroad" as a reliable source for the birthday, but actually relies on it for many other additions to the article. She or he then adds material from the subject's own website that has no other cited source and uses Asha's own Twitter feed as the source for other edits she or he made, rejecting "Sauce for the goose..." I'm just trying to understand the parameters here. Activist (talk) 07:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * A random comment is entirely undue for a biography and has no other relevance to this subject's life. The fact that the comment makes unsupported claims about correctional officers accepting bribes is a BLP violation. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Absolutely undue and should not be a part of the article. This is unacceptable WP:SYNTH.  If you can find an RS that says she is known for conspiracy theories, then we can evaluate that.  Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 17:20, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Using Asha instead of Rangappa
Rangappa is a patronymic, not used to refer to the person valereee (talk) 09:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Yet another reversion to using Rangappa. This is a patronymic, not a surname, and she is correctly referred to by her first name, Asha, or her full name, Asha Rangappa, but not by her last name as is usual with surnames. --valereee (talk) 11:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Every source refers to her as "Rangappa". If you think it should be "Asha", then that needs to based on reliable sourcing, not original research. – Wallyfromdilbert (talk) 00:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , leaving this to editors with more knowledge of the issue than me. --valereee (talk) 01:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Out at CNN?
She is suddenly popping up on MSNBC shows, the past month or so (Morning Joe, Chris Hayes) 73.219.103.208 (talk) 00:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)