Talk:Mary Miller (politician)

“White Supremacist” in lead
I’m guessing whoever added that was probably referring to this incident. I’m not going to revert the description just yet since I’d rather wait to see what other editors think. But, I’m sure Miller or her campaign will probably end up claiming that comment was just a slip of the tongue on her part. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:1F5F (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Her quoting Hitler in Jan 2021 had people already thinking hm, she might be a big ol' racist. 87.74.152.189 (talk) 08:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I feel like it would be helpful to group those two comments into a single section, such as "Controversies" (maybe by renaming the section on the Hitler comment). It's not up to Wikipedia to draw conclusions, but we can certainly present all the evidence together for readers to make up their mind. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2022
At the end of the first paragraph change "supremacist" to "supremacy". (A supremacist is a single individual, while supremacy refers to a state or quality, such MxBuster (talk) 00:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Moot point now. Endwise (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Far Right label warranted?
Mary Miller is an open ally of MTG and other figures along those lines and has been called far right by numerous sources. Calling her far right is like calling Paul Gosar or MTG far right.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/politics/mary-miller-rodney-davis-il.html

"she is a member of the far-right Freedom Caucus who has adopted Mr. Trump’s grievance-infused manner of speaking and once spoke approvingly of Adolf Hitler."

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-election-2022-gop-lauren-boebert-mary-miller-rino-20220629-j6twyrfg6zblrgptu6kkq7vw4u-story.html

"With a few notable exceptions, far-right politicians have mostly fared well in the Republican primaries ahead of the midterm elections."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/13/politics/mary-miller-republican-primary-illinois/index.html

"GOP leaders seek to fend off Trump endorsement as far-right Republican eyes Illinois primary bid"

https://news.yahoo.com/lot-far-candidates-got-walloped-212826737.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-wannabe-mtg-mary-miller-is-pushing-establishment-republican-rodney-davis-over-the-edge Fenetrejones (talk) 00:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * https://illinoisnewsroom.org/mary-miller-and-rodney-davis-square-off-in-heated-gop-primary-to-return-to-congress/
 * "Miller is a member of the far right House Freedom and Second Amendment caucuses. Davis isn’t." Fenetrejones (talk) 00:12, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * more:
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/19/emerging-far-right-no-caucus-house/ Fenetrejones (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * MOS:LEADBIO states "The lead sentence should describe the person as they are commonly described in reliable sources." It is not sufficient to find a handful of sources that mention her association with far-right elements. You need to show that nearly all sources primarily describe her that way, so much that the label cannot be separated from her. You've only provided a single source directly calling her "far-right" (CNN). The others describe her membership in groups and association with people.
 * I am able to find a number of additional sources about her that do not call her a far-right politician, even ones that are about the "white life" incident:, , . Your sources are enough to add something further down in the body of the article saying what the sources say, that she is associated with this or that far-right group or person, not to make it her defining characteristic in the lead. Choosing a label for a person and working backwards from that by searching for the keyword in sources is not going to work. The question is, when I open the average RS article about Miller, will I see "Far-right politician Mary Miller..."? The answer is no. VERY few people clear that bar. Marjorie Taylor-Greene and Doug Mastriano are examples. ― Tartan357  Talk 00:22, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * fair, but is definitely far right. guess just not like that. Fenetrejones (talk) 00:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * If it matters to you, I personally think she is far-right, but the media spotlight has not been on her enough for us to have the sourcing basis for this. On Wikipedia, we are strictly limited by what the sources say, especially when it comes to living people. ― Tartan357  Talk 00:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair, like you said, put it in the article that she is tied with it, not at the start. done. Fenetrejones (talk) 00:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * like you said, sources there, just not defining characteristic Fenetrejones (talk) 00:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Good talk, and thank you for the input. Fenetrejones (talk) 00:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Good talk, and thank you for the input. Fenetrejones (talk) 00:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Farm subsidies
Hi Fenetrejones, can we discuss your edit of my edit? I want to get all the best information into the article. I can see where you are coming from, but the phrase isn't really describing Miller as a politician, but Miller in her home life. This was the phrase again: "Miller's farm has received more than $1M in farm subsidies, which has drawn criticism from opponents due to accepting campaign donations from the Club for Growth, which opposes farm subsidies."

If you look at the current section headers, there are really only three: Early Life, US House of Reps, and Personal Life. Out of the three, since it deals with her personal farm, I thought Personal Life seemed like a good fit. Or would you have a suggestion as to a different place within the article? DontGetButterOnMyDocuments (talk) 19:46, 8 July 2022 (UTC)


 * might not be wikipedia worthy besides mentioning that she owns a farm to be honest. Fenetrejones (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The source used was a quote in Poltico by an opponent, which does not establish it as a fact. I would like to see more coverage before it is included. At least then we could include her response.
 * This type of hypocrisy accusation is often unfair. Miller has to compete with farmers who do receive subsidies and might earn more if trade agreements allowed her to access the Canadian and Mexican markets. But their governments oppose U.S. farm subsidies.
 * TFD (talk) 20:43, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

LGBTQ legislation
, I reverted your edit but I do think the text needs to be improved. Rather than calling it an "anti-LGBTQ", I think it might be better to use the summary of the bill from the source. The source said the bill, "... tackles a politically-fraught subject — whether or not people assigned male at birth but who identify as female or otherwise can share spaces traditionally set aside for biological females. " Something along those lines both does a better job telling the reader what the bill actually tries to do ("anti-LGBTQ is very vague") as well as retains IMPARTIAL in the way we describe the bill. Would you oppose such a change? Springee (talk) 20:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The sources literally call it anti-trans. WP:IMPARTIAL basically means we shouldn't be putting our own interpretations, it does not mean that we should not include content that is sourced just because it's negative. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:59, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * It took me a bit to get this to open without a pay wall coming up. Anyway, I don't see where the article describes the bill as "anti-trans" (I did a keyword search).  I think describing the bill as one that, "would require people in schools to use bathrooms and locker rooms and to participate in sports teams designated for their biological sex."  Gets the critical information across while being impartial as to opinions on/morality of the bill.  Impartial means we use neutral characterizations.  Certainly "anti-trans" is going to characterize this bill.  However, "anti-trans" carries a lot of moral baggage.  If we have sources that describe the bill as such then we are describing the dispute.  If we use that label ourselves then we are engaging in the dispute which violates IMAPRTAIL.  Springee (talk) 21:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I went to have a look at the article and I also can't find the quote on the anti-trans thing - albeit I did have to zoom out and screenshot it before the paywall came in. Though it's worth noting there are sources describing the bill as anti-trans - this for one, this for another and this. Though I can't access the last one as it's apparently blocked by Cloudflare (presumably just blocking non-US IPs). ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 22:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)