Talk:Katie Amess

Removing "Publicly Criticised"
Based on what is actually said in the source, she said “I love my father and he’s entitled to his opinion but I disagree with him on gay marriage,” this is almost the exact opposite of 'Criticising his opinion', she respected his opinion. 'Criticised' is WP:SYNTH at best, WP:SCANDAL at worst; I considered rewording it, but decided that this leaves  'Daughter has a different opinion to her father' and the appropriate weight for this fact is zero JeffUK (talk) 07:25, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That is respecting his right to an opinion, not respecting the content of it. Equally quotable is "I believe everyone should be treated equally and I am proud to do my bit to support gays and lesbians and raise awareness of this very important issue."  It is not really tenable to interpret that as anything other than critical of the opinion that the right to marriage("very important issue") should not be extended to gay people. Kevin McE (talk) 10:46, 23 October 2021 (UTC)


 * It is not our place to interpret her statements. The article does not say she publicly criticised his opinion in particular. She did express an opinion which is clearly different to his, but that’s not the same at all JeffUK (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Reading and understanding is interpreting. I think you are playing semantics here.  There is no way that a statement that gay people should be treated equally with respect to what is, in the speaker's opinion, a very important matter is not critical of the opinion of those who would not treat gay people equally in that regard.  Saying that an opinion is supporting unequal treatment in a very important area is being critical of that position.   You have now removed the statement three times, without establishing any consensus for its removal. Kevin McE (talk) 23:44, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * she made a statement that is different to her fathers view, to say she specifically criticised her fathers view is simply not verified by the source, removing unverified information from BLP does not require consensus; adding artificial controversy and scandal to BLP is disruptive JeffUK (talk) 18:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)