Talk:Janice McGeachin

Little vs McGeachin
& bring your disagreement 'here'. PS - Interesting that McGeachin is challenging Little for the 2022 Republican gubernatorial nomination. GoodDay (talk) 01:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the ping and the suggestion. I believe the issue at the Noticeboard needs to be resolved first. Then I'll address the article. But I do agree with you. It is very interesting, as I pointed out in my last edit here - which is the subject of the Noticeboard. It is also being noted elsewhere, including just recently here. X4n6 (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I hope you both can work this out. GoodDay (talk) 02:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Many thanks again. If you wouldn't mind, you may be called upon if consensus becomes necessary to restore the edit. X4n6 (talk) 02:32, 9 September 2021 (UTC)


 * It appears that we now have Noticeboard resolution, so I've restored the edit. Thanks again for your support. X4n6 (talk) 03:01, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The 2022 Idaho Republican primary will be interesting, assuming Governor Little seeks re-election. GoodDay (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it's a safe bet that all elections between now and 2024 will be interesting. But particularly, in the primaries. With Idaho being no exception. X4n6 (talk) 03:24, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Lead
Alright, since any more reverts will bring us beyond the WP:3RR: User:MarchantTrust, do you want to explain why the sources provided aren’t “good enough” in your view? They’re all cited and properly referenced and on those grounds should stay on Wikipedia, regardless of your own assessment of this politician’s views - so if you want this excluded, you’ll need to demonstrate with proper sources and find consensus to remove it, rather than just going back and forth. I’d also remind you of WP:NPA - as much as I’m flattered you’d see my efficiency as being “bot-like”, I’m not a “bot” and I don’t see what my nationality has to do with any of this. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 06:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)


 * copy MarchantTrust (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Dear Sir;
 * I really don’t want to get into a protracted political discussion, but I wanted to discuss this more and answer some of your concerns.  I had several issues with the entry and here is the list:
 * Far-right:  I see that term a lot these days and I don’t think anyone really knows what it means.  So, a quick trip to several dictionary sources reveal that it applies to “extreme” ideology; specifically conservative.  However, these days, it seem to be applied to anyone or any idea that is deemed “conservative” or even “moderate.”  I actually live in Idaho, and I reviewed every candidate’s historical background in order to make an informed decision, and although McGeachin did not get my vote today (today (05/17/22) is our primaries) I still did my due diligence and researched her background.  When I saw “far-right” I wanted to look further.  I looked into her personal life (as far as my background software could go. I am a retired detective) and I saw no sign of that ideology.  I see a female business owner who has several small businesses and services all manner and type of public customers.  I researched her State representative voting record, and again I saw no sign of extreme ideology.  In fact on several occasions, she voted against the conservative majority on several matters that would adversely affect her constituents.  I looked into her political background and the only thin g I saw was that she supported some guy named “ENGEL,” which I assume is “Todd Engel.” I also did more research and found out Engel’s story .  I don’t know much about that Nevada standoff, but it seemed like the usual Federal over-reaction (Like Ruby Ridge, like Waco, etc.  So, yeah, he was an Idaho resident and yeah he was screwed over (I mean the 9th overturned the conviction, The 9th Circus!  Must have been a real doozie of a case. )  Still, I saw no extreme ideology.  What I did see were TONS of “hit pieces.”  I mean The Daily Beast???  Really? If you did deep enough you see many were funded directly, or with current Governor Brad Little’s money or PACs. Kind of sad actually, as I see how one could search her name and come up with tons of articles that say what they say, but who wrote them and why??  Anyway interesting times we live in.
 * You mentioned would your Country be an issue.  Well if even a slight interest in any news were undertaken, you would see tons of articles regarding election interference from foreign entities.  The packet sniffer I have tied you to a server out of Ireland.  Perhaps it was just a server loop, or perhaps it was just routing.  If it is I apologize.
 * Lastly my cites.  I am rarely on social media anymore.  I just signed back on to Twitter, but if that deal falls through I am off so fast my keyboard would alite in fire!  I did not miss it.  It was like reading stuff on a bathroom wall from ill-informed or mis-informed people.  I just don’t have the time or energy to fight all the stupidity in the world.  Life is way, way too short.  Some of these “people” post what they ate for breakfast, or where they went last night. Like anyone cares!
 * I have rarely edited Wikipedia.  I realize it is not a true source and is not recognized as a source by the American Psychological Association (APA) for academic papers citation, but it is a place to start.  I did when researching papers and topics when I was in school, but in graduate school they would kill you if you used Wikipedia.  But it is a great source to start, and it provided tons of great reading.  I applaud the editors that take their job seriously to make it a better site.
 * So, in conclusion, I apologize if there was any animosity, I really though you were a bot.  My bad.  I am a rookie.  But I am not going to pursue it anymore.  Everyone has their own opinion, I thought I saw a wrong and tried to right it.  I do pose a question though:  If she is “far-right” what would an Arian Brotherhood member be? Far-far-right? Super-far-right?  If you, as an editor, set that bar that low, there is no room for the real idiots in life.
 * Peace!
 * Ray M. MarchantTrust (talk) 01:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I'd highly disagree on your assessment that everyone is dubbed as "far-right" these days - the vast majority of the Republican Party aren't referred to as "far-right" on Wikipedia, only the ones who hold what are seen as far-right political positions - and based on the amount of sources in the media referring to McGeachin as having far right views, that's what goes on Wikipedia. One of Wikipedia's core policies is Verifiability, not truth (an essay I'd highly recommend reading because it explains it better than I could) - if it's verifiable by multiple respectable sources, it's what goes in, because verifiability is what Wikipedia deals in. And while I do understand you did your research on this candidate, another one of Wikipedia's tenets is No original research - again, we just go based off what the majority of high quality sources say. And when various sources on the Perennial sources list (New York Times, The Guardian, NPR and ABC to give you just four of them) describe McGeachin as holding far-right positions, that's what stays. (For reference, the source noticeboard does reflect that The Daily Beast is a biased and opinionated source and advises against using it, hence why it's not used in the article.) On the final note, yes, it's true that I am Irish (though I was actually editing from another European country at the time, so I suspect your packet sniffer may not be working) - but this shouldn't really make a difference in terms of the article - editing articles to add what the media is already saying is certainly not any sort of sinister electoral interference in my view, and I would hope you aren't accusing me of that - always remember WP:AGF! Long story short, what goes on Wikipedia is based on entirely what reliable and verifiable sources say, and it certainly appears to me that the majority of these describe McGeachin as holding far-right views, so it's reflected on here. Hope this helps. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 07:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @MarchantTrust@Ser! I'm not getting involved in this article, but what we say about The Daily Beast at WP:RSNP is actually "There is no consensus on the reliability of The Daily Beast. Most editors consider The Daily Beast a biased or opinionated source. Some editors advise particular caution when using this source for controversial statements of fact related to living persons." Note that we do use biased sources at times, it is kind of hard not to. See [WP:BIASEDSOURCES]]. Doug Weller  talk 12:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 12:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Appreciated. MarchantTrust (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Removal of cited content
please cease the edit warring. The content you’re removing is cited by reliable sources. If you have an issue with page content, the onus is on you to discuss it on the talk page per WP:BRD and WP:3RR, instead of removing it over and over when other editors disagree. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 18:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)