Talk:Michael Grimm (politician)

2014 Re-election
Shouldn't it be explicitly stated in the intro and in the subsection about his 2014 re-election that he ran and won while under indictment? A reader has to put two and two together to learn this fact unless and until they reach the section Federal criminal investigation way down the page. --71.183.128.251 (talk) 14:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * If there's a good source that explicitly links the two, then sure. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Why does Wikipedia display racial, gender, political affiliation bias in BLP articles?
I feel this article needs to be edited to properly reflect the unfairness of this former politician's article when comparing to other befallen politician articles on Wikipedia. I realize that she has only just been convicted. However, other politicians convicted for far less have been thrown to the wolves (as written in their BLP on Wiki) for their transgressions. So, why the blatant bias handling of this "criminal" and her BLP? To be more specific, I am referring to the titling of her indictment, charges and conviction listed under a smaller font with a title of "political controversies" when comparing it to other less known criminals, previously responsible politicians. See Michael Grimm. The above was posted on recently convicted criminal Corinne Brown talk page. I request that wiki be more even handed in the POV of BLP's when situations are similar.2602:306:8B8C:29A0:4CEF:D74C:D98C:4A0E (talk) 04:20, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Lead: add convicted felon to description
There was a discussion a few years ago about whether or not he was a convicted felon. Now that he has been convicted, sentenced, served his sentence, and released, can we all agree that he is a "convicted felon"? Danielt (talk) 14:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * As mentioned by previous editor recently, I too do not support adding "convicted felon" to the lead. IMHO, It can come across as a politically charged comment in the lead. The convicted felon coverage is in the main body, towards the top, so it is front and center. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 18:55, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I favour including it in the lead sentence. It forms a core part of his notability.  The idea that this is somehow "politically charged" seems like an extraneous notion, something that doesn't merit consideration in connection with core policies/guidelines.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I also favor it, considering that it forms a big part of his notoriety, he is trying to mount a political comeback, and it is certain to be a campaign issue. There are also many other articles that mention a person's felon status in the lead. I don't think it's political - it's a fact. Danielt (talk) 21:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I also favor it, it is common to state that in the lead, defintitely more important and recent as him serving in the Persian Gulf War. It is a main part of his vita, so it should be mentioned in the summary. Besides, I notice that it gets erased by anonymous users, which seem to have a partisan agenda. --FideKoeln (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

188.238.78.85 is constantly reverting the lead section and not participating in the discussion here. He/she also doesn't use a registered user name and seems to change IP's, as they are all from the same provider in Finnland. I would like ask the user again, to participate on the talk page instead of engaging in an editing war. I would also encourage you, to use a registered user name. --FideKoeln (talk) 05:42, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The POV in the lead is outrageous. The word "felony" appears THREE times in the lead! In case some of you have forgotten, he was convicted of one count and served  eight seven months. He is not I repeat is not the Golden State Killer. The repetitive inflammatory language must be removed per MOS:LEADREL.
 * The section describing the one count is way, way too long. Seven paragraphs. It is the longest section. It violates WP:DUE and WP:TOOMUCH. – Lionel(talk) 11:35, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Michael Grimm (politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111020061545/http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Michael_Grimm to http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Michael_Grimm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120421165517/http://grimm.house.gov/about-me/full-biography to http://grimm.house.gov/about-me/full-biography
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20110216075745/http://www.thestatecolumn.com/state_politics/new-york/rep-michael-grimm-stands-up-for-israel-opposes-cuts-to-aid/ to http://www.thestatecolumn.com/state_politics/new-york/rep-michael-grimm-stands-up-for-israel-opposes-cuts-to-aid/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140201230830/http://www.ny1.com/content/pages/202672/rep--grimm-threatens-ny1-reporter-following-state-of-the-union to http://www.ny1.com/content/pages/202672/rep--grimm-threatens-ny1-reporter-following-state-of-the-union
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140201231024/http://www.ny1.com/content/news/202674/rep--grimm-apologizes-to-ny1-reporter-for-on-camera-threat to http://www.ny1.com/content/news/202674/rep--grimm-apologizes-to-ny1-reporter-for-on-camera-threat
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140223084730/http://www.ny1.com/content/politics/ny1_political_itch/202681/ny1-itch--a-grimm-tale-of-disunion-in-washington to http://www.ny1.com/content/politics/ny1_political_itch/202681/ny1-itch--a-grimm-tale-of-disunion-in-washington

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:15, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

"Trolling"?
, I would've let your undo of my edit go if not for you accusing me of "trolling". So, assume good faith, first off. Secondly, MOS:ROLEBIO says The lead sentence should describe the person as they are commonly described in reliable sources. The noteworthy position(s) or role(s) the person held should usually be stated in the opening paragraph. However, avoid overloading the lead paragraph with various and sundry roles; instead, emphasize what made the person notable. Grimm is notable as a former member of Congress, not for business, military service, or his conviction. Third, starting an article with "X is a convicted felon" is a bad practice that should be ended per WP:BLP. It's been discussed on other pages, including an active discussion on Talk:Michael Avenatti. And fourth, the fact that the lead sentence was like that "before" doesn't mean it was right. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * First of all I am sorry for using the term trolling. If you go back in the history, there were quite some attempts to make this a politically more favorable in the lead and when I saw your change, I just assumed you were one of them. Should have checked.
 * I agree, that him being a businessman is for sure not as defining. But being a convicted felon is at least as important as being a politician --FideKoeln (talk) 22:37, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Oops!
I don't know exactly what I just did to this article or how to fix it, but it certainly was not intentional. Dgndenver (talk) 17:12, 24 November 2022 (UTC)