Talk:DeDreana Freeman

"Durham Officials Directed City Attorney to Try to Unmask Anonymous Wikipedia Editors"
https://indyweek.com/news/durham/durham-officials-directed-city-attorney-to-try-to-unmask-anonymous-wikipedia-editors/ 152.3.43.41 (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article277624088.html -- 66.56.222.197 (talk) 14:54, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Noting for completeness, this has also been discussed at ANI ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 18:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

== Including the recent WP-whatever that was in the news in the WP-article text BRD ==

Please join if you have an opinion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree with removing, for now, the story about Freeman's attempt to squelch unfavorable Wikipedia coverage. If this gets picked up by media outside the Raleigh-Durham area, then we should put it back in.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 15:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree with exclusion. What we have here is something that has been covered by multiple independent reliable newsorgs. The News and Observer is a deeply serious publication of statewide importance in North Garolina. That the sources reporting on this are based in the Research Triangle, an area with over 2 million people, doesn't seem to be all that different from the rest of the page's content, which is similarly sourced to publications from The Triangle.
 * Out of the six sources currently on the page:
 * One is Duke's student newspaper;
 * Another is 9th Street Journal, which is another Duke University source;
 * Another is her capmaign website;
 * Another is her official City of Durham biography;
 * Another is the News and Observer (via Yahoo!)
 * Another is IndyWeek
 * I see no basis to exclude this from the page of a local official on the basis that the content is produced by sources who cover local and statewide news when the entire page is already more or less derived from such sources. We're already using The News and Observer for the whole extortion shebang—something appropriate given the deep seriousness of the paper and its importance statewide. Why have different sourcing standards for this incident, which is also something that appears to be of public concern given the use of taxpayer money? — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 16:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I see the "thing" has been re-added, and IMO the current paragraph fails WP:PROPORTION and WP:NOTNEWS. There is also an essay called WP:NAVELGAZING. Also, the heading "Politics" doesn't fit very well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The heading could be changed to "political career" if you'd like. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Thoughts on adding this incident?
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article282199063.html 189.28.44.38 (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)