Talk:Lynne DiSanto

Should political hit jobs be part of an article on a biography page?
If this page contained all of Disanto's accomplishments and her controversies I could see including the content I removed. However to simply have a stub page where the majority of the content is meant to hurt the person politically seems to me to go against the spirit of wikipedia as a non-biased source for information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryno35 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Inaccurate and Innappropriate content
The majority of this content is meant to hurt the subject of this article politically. It is not relevant to the biography of the subject. At least one editor User:Velella thinks the content is appropriate because "when a politician posts material herself that appears to show support for white supremacist views, then that is something very significant". However the social media post in question did not in any way "show support for white supremacist". This is the opinion of User:Velella and shows the political bias they bring to the editing of this article. As it stands now the content is inaccurate. The subject is no longer a member of the South Dakota House or Representatives. Ryno35 (talk) 23:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The content, that has been there since 2017, is supported by reliable sources including the Washington Post. A politician and a whip in the state legislature publishing the sort of content that she did is highly notable and has a bearing on her political views and possibly those of the party she represents. The post was withdrawn some time later and an apology was made but there was no denial of the facts. Removing such content amounts to white-washing a relevant history. For the record, I have no political opinions relevant to the United States, nor do I edit Wikipedia with any political agenda. To do so would be an anathema to the principles of Wikipedia.  Velella  Velella Talk 19:16, 1 May 2019 (UTC)