Talk:Darleen Tana

Balance
I have a COI hence can't make substantive edits. I don't think that the following sentence is balanced or correct: The news service also reported that Tana had missed numerous Parliamentary sitting days despite being a fully-paid Member of Parliament. Tana is suspended, hence she cannot attend. The sentence can be read to imply that she somehow chooses to miss the sitting days, which is of course incorrect. , could you take another look, please?  Schwede 66  23:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, I had a second look at the Newshub article in question. The article devotes the headline and the lead sentence to talking about Tana missing "as many Parliament sitting days this year as she has been present" but doesn't go into detail. It seems to be a textbook example of a click-bait article or agenda setting that doesn't actually talk about her missing on Parliamentary sitting days. It is more about the Green Party's independent investigation into her business practices. Do you think it would be wise to remove the sentence about her missing numerous Parliamentary sitting days to ensure balance? Andykatib (talk) 23:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I feel the balance in the article is skewed by the statement and I agree removing it would provide better balance Andykatib. Once the investigation has completed there will be more reporting and ability for the matter to be expanded. Pakoire (talk) 00:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi and, have removed that sentence about her missing parliamentary sitting days. This should restore balance. Also added an RNZ article about funding for the investigation. It seems that the media are trying to shape the agenda around the investigation. Andykatib (talk) 00:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Citing substacks
The Victoria University of Wellington political scientist and Democracy Project editor Bryce Edwards has published a Substack article exploring whether waka-jumping legislation can be used against Darleen Tana. I am not sure what Wikipedia's policy on Substacks is. Can we cite them? Andykatib 12:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * @Andykatib: Substack is a self-publishing website, so I'm thinking WP:RSSELF applies. "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." That would seem to apply to Edwards. Extra caution is needed though because the article is a BLP; it might depend on exactly what you're looking to add to the article? Is there something Edwards says that other sources don't? Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, worth bearing in mind that matters are likely to develop more over the next few weeks, so we probably don't want to be going too much into speculation about what might/might not happen. Chocmilk03 (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your advice regarding Substacks. Might be safer for me to rely on media sources for now. Winston Peters has called on the Greens to use waka-jumping legislation against Darleen Tana. Andykatib (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good plan! :) Chocmilk03 (talk) 22:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, proceed with caution. It could be ok to cite this given that Edwards is a political commentator and lecturer who is regularly published by reputable sources. But as Chocmilk says, it depends what it is that you wish to cite.  Schwede 66  04:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)