Talk:Joanne Giannini

Happy Endings

 * The Amazon reference should not be used, but since you mention it, Joanne Giannini is mentioned on Amazon under Product Description, Actors. The IMDB reference does list Giannini, and that is the in line reference.  There is nothing about Hurley in this paragraph, so I wonder why you would bring her up here? Take some time to read over WP:SYNTH, you seem to be jumping to a few conclusions. Not that it matters but I believe that Hurley is not pro-legalization of prostitution, rather she advocated applying Sweden's law on prostitution.  You can see that here: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2009/08/19/focus_on_demand_not_the_supply/

You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC) _________________________________________________________________________________________

Here is the entire discussion regarding recent Rep. Joanne Giannini page edits. I am a new editor and this conversation took place on my Talk page. I intended this discussion to be available to all for editorial comments and suggestions, so here it is. Thanks, EconProfessor

________________________________________

Joanne Gianinni In general we require reliable Secondary sources to include material. An editorial does not meet this criteria. The other sources you've included are perfect for factual inclusion on legislation, such as bills submitted, i.e. child strippers and cell phone usage while driving. Editorial writings do not qualify as sources as they are points of view.You Can't Clap with One Hand (talk) 02:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I read the wikipedia guidelines and I did not see any specfic prohibitions on using quotes from a reliable secondary source newspaper editorials. Individuals should not be prohibited from inclusion in wikipedia simply because of their occupation. EconProfessor EconProfessor (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

editorials are used to push an agenda. Wikipedia is not the place for editorials. Also the film Happy Endings? Is referenced by imdb and the Providence journal, not amazon. Amazon would not be reference material as it is a commercial website. The paragraph about Gianinni does not have any point of viewother than the fact that her strugle to get her bill passed is in a documentary film.--You Can't Clap with One Hand (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

The general promotional description of Tara Hurley's Happy Endings DVD should be removed from Rep. Giannini's wikipedia page. Wikipedia is not to be used as a means of marketing products. Giannini had a very minor role as one of many people being interviewed during the film. Please read footnote 3. The Providence Journal film review does not even mention Joanne Giannini. The amazon description is not on Giannini's wikipedia page (and it shouldn't be) but by checking this external reference we can see that this film description does not mention Joanne Giannini either. http://www.amazon.com/Endings-Masage-Parlors-Island-Prositution/dp/B002KBIIPQ/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top Because the film was not specifically about Giannini, there should not be an extensive description of this film and its characters on her wikipedia page. Providence Mayor David Cicilline is another RI official who was interviewed by Hurley during the film, and his wikipedia page experienced the similar inclusion of a Happy Endings promotional description.(The Happy Endings description on his page is shorter than what's on Giannini's page.) Loodog objected on July 30, 2009 "he appears in a film is not an excuse to spam that film into this article." Note that the broader "Prostitution in RI" wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Rhode_Island contains only a short, 19-word film summary about the DVD "a documentary about Asian brothels in Rhode Island during a battle in the state legislature to make prostitution illegal." Hurley actually opposed Giannini's legislation, as shown on this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_Hurley. Hurley wanted to keep prostitution legal in RI and she brought spa workers to the Senate hearings to testify against the prostitution bills. Thus in addition to the spam issue, placing Hurley's movie description on Giannini's site gives undue weight to Hurley's opposing view (i.e. pro-legalized prostitution) and it does so without identifying on the wikipedia page that it's presenting an opposing view. Finally, we must remember that the Happy Endings DVD is an unrated indie film about prostitution. Special care must always be taken with respect to Living Person Biographies. For all these reasons, the description and references to the Happy Endings DVD should be deleted from Rep. Joanne Giannini's page. EconProfessor (talk) 14:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The Amazon reference should not be used, but since you mention it, Joanne Giannini is mentioned on Amazon. The IMDB reference does list Gianinni, and that is the in line reference. There is nothing about Hurley in this paragraph, so I wonder why you would bring her up here? Take some time to read over WP:SYNTH, you seem to be jumping to a few conclusions. Not that it matters but I believe that Hurley is not pro-legalization of prostitution, rather she advocated applying Sweden's law on prostitution. You can see that here: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2009/08/19/focus_on_demand_not_the_supply/ In the future, lets take up this discussion on the article's talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GiselleRI (talk • contribs) 16:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The current general movie description for Happy Endings does not belong on the Giannini Wikipedia page. My point in referring to the Providence Journal and Amazon film sources on this talk page is to show that Rep. Giannini had a minimal role in the film Happy Endings. I referred to Tara Hurley because she is the Happy Endings film-maker who is identified in the Giannini page footnote links 3 and 4 for the Providence Journal and IMBD. This film's primary focus was about following the lives of Asian spa workers, not about Giannini herself. The DVD presents an opposing view to Giannini's legislation, but the current description on the Giannini Wikipedia page does not indicate this. Here is a quote from Tara Hurley's own Wikipedia page "In addition to working for tougher trafficking laws, Hurley testified before the senate to keep prostitution legal. When testifying, Hurley brought women from the spas to testify against prostitution laws as well." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_Hurley Film-maker Hurley clearly was active in trying to keep prostitution legal in RI. This means she held an opposing view to Giannini's legislation, which was intended -- and ultimately did -- criminalize prostitution. If Hurley later changed her mind after the June senate hearings (which was after the movie was made) and decided to support the Swedish model (which criminalizes only johns), then that information could be included on Hurley's wikipedia page, but it's irrelevant for Giannini's page. GiselleRI created Giannini's page on July 31, 2009, the day after Loodog asked her to stop spamming the DVD on Cicilline's page. Then the next day, August 1, GiselleRI posted her Happy Endings DVD summary on the new Wikipedia page she had created for Giannini. These are all just facts. People may draw their own conclusions.

The bottom line is that this DVD about prostitution, made by someone who actively and publically opposed Rep. Giannini's legislative work on prostitution, should not be promoted on Giannini's Wikipedia page. I also feel it is incorrect to describe the DVD as documenting "Two years of her fight to change the prostitution law" when that was not the film's perspective. In addition, the inclusion of this general film description skews the Legislative section too much in the direction of prostitution, and this creates an unbalanced and thus misleading overview of Rep. Giannini's legislative work over the course of her 16 years in office. Finally, this DVD is not a G-rated film. It's about prostitution, it's unrated, and it has strong sexual content. Promoting this DVD on Rep. Giannini's page could be a violation of policies for Living Person Biographies.

Are you willing to delete or significantly edit the paragraph in any way in light of my concerns? I am new to Wikipedia and I thought our discussion on these talk pages was already available to other readers. I would be happy to copy our entire conversation to the article's discussion page. If you insist on continuing to undo the edits I make, I can look into finding out how to ask other editors to assist in resolving our differences. EconProfessor (talk) 21:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EconProfessor" EconProfessor (talk) 22:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I have edited the paragraph, removed the word struggle and replaced with debate as quoted in the Providence Journal citation. I feel that this is sufficient.  As for your concerns, I think you are drawing conclusions about Hurley's point of view.  If you read the entire wiki page on Tara Hurley you will also see "Before making Happy Endings?, Hurley says she had no preconceived notions on prostitution, and wanted to make the film to find out how she felt as a woman and a feminist about prostitution. In one interview Hurley states "I couldn’t force an opinion on anyone because I didn’t really have one. After making the film, doing all the research, and meeting all the people, I personally believe that all prostitution laws harm the women that they claim to protect. When a woman is arrested and gets a criminal record, she no longer has a chance to get out of sex work even if she wanted to. When filling out a job application it will be difficult to explain the criminal record, especially with all the stigma that comes with prostitution. To add insult to injury, I am offended that only the woman is arrested."  I do not like to use WP:SYNTH since you have been using it to draw some conclusions, I would use this quote to draw the conclusion that the film does not have a bias or any point of view.  Also the editorial that I referenced before where Hurley advocates for the Swedish law was written before the law changed, so you are making a very big assumption about Hurley changing her mind.  I believe she actually testified for the Swedish model at the hearings, you can check her blog for that.  (Of course much of this back and forth between us has been on assumptions, things that are not allowed in wikipedia, but as you are new to wikipedia I assume good faith and am trying to respond to your questions)  As for the prostitution legislation being to unbalanced, I would say that in the 16 years that Giannini has been in office she has had more local press coverage on the one prostitution bill than all other bills combined.  She also had national coverage on television and newspapers for the prostitution bill.  I do not believe any other bill she drafted ever made a national paper, never mind a national television broadcast.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 03:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * When reading Hurley's wikipedia page the in line citation does not say she testified against the prostitution bill. I have edited her page to reflect the correct information.  You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 04:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have also updated the Tara Hurley page to reflect her feelings on the Swedish law that she supported. Thanks for pointing that out.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 14:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

The paragraph was removed again, this time with no reason given, by a user that was not logged in. Wikipedia works on community. We must come to a consensus on this issue. I have made changes to the paragraph, removing the word struggle and replacing it with debate to in light of the concerns of Econprofessor. Paragraphs should not be removed when there are sourced, especially when this paragraph has two sources, IMDB and the Providence Journal.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I continue to disagree with including the Happy Endings description and its cast here on Giannini's page. Just because something has sources doesn't mean it should be included on someone's page. GiselleRI has now added the "See Prostitution in RI" statement. This links to the Prostitution in RI wikipedia page, and that page describes Happy Endings. If you want to put this in instead of the paragraph in question, that would be sufficient coverage. However, if you put this new statement in, and also leave in the original description, you have written even more about Happy Endings in response to my concerns. Once again I ask that this paragraph be removed.EconProfessor (talk) 01:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The "See Prostitution in RI" was already there, but I have removed it since you are concerned about it. I  also improved the layout.  I  disagree with taking out Happy Endings? because it is referenced and there is no reason given to remove it.  The reasons you have given in the past were all due to WP:SYNTH, so I see no reason to remove a documentary that is observational in nature, promotes no point of view, and is referenced with Gianinni included in itYou Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 22:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have made many of your recommended changes to the article by removing and changing words. I think you should consider WP:LETITGO, I know this is your first time editing, but maybe you should try and move on to another article where your expertise would help.  Take a look at WP:VA, I am sure you will find something you can add to these articles, instead of arguing over removing things from this article.  The paragraph you are concerned about is actually only 3 sentences.  But if you insist, just bring it to editorial review.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 22:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually I just went back and looked, the "paragraph" you are concerned about is only 2 sentences, and it has 2 references.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Your instructions for me to "let go" or to move on to another article are unfriendly. If you think this edit is insignificant and it doesn't matter much to you, then maybe you should be the one to let go. I may be new to Wikipedia, but I know I have just as much right to edit this article as you do.

I have added new content to Giannini's article. This article is a stub and it needs people like me to be here adding content. I have also given many reasons why the detailed description of this prostitution movie does not belong on Rep. Giannini's page. Those details are extraneous and only serve to promote this movie. You have edited and rearranged other parts of this article, but you refused to shorten or change any of that movie description. Why?

Compare to the David Cicilline Wikipedia page. He is listed as the first "actor" in the Amazon listing for Happy Endings and you wrote a general 1/2 sentence for him on Wikipedia: "He has personally testified in Superior court to stop the opening of "spas" in Providence, and has also appeared in the 2009 documentary Happy Endings?, a film that follows the lives of the women in the Asian massage parlors in the center of the debate to re-criminalize prostitution." Joanne Giannini had a much more minor role in being interviewed in this film, yet you continue to insist on including much more promotional information about this movie on her Wikipedia page.EconProfessor (talk) 13:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe a consensus is now reached on the Happy Endings? inclusion. I just put the wikilink back in.  Enjoy editing.You Can&#39;t Clap with One Hand (talk) 03:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)