Talk:Rachel Marsden/Archive 3

Marsden's job at Fox
Marsden is panelist on the late-night show Red Eye. http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117958651.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&query=red+eye

Alaric the Goth 18:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why the Conservatives' offer of a nomination and their subsequent withdrawal of same ins an encyclopedic fact. Alaric the Goth


 * When a major political party seeks out a nationally-known journalist as a candidate, it's notable. CJCurrie 23:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * If the Communists claim to scout Bob Rae, will we put it in Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaric the Goth (talk • contribs)


 * Are the Communists "a major political party"? Or is this just a straw man for you to knock down?  AverageGuy 14:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

It's in the same paragraph as her conditional discharge. It can really only be read as something negative and quite gratuitous. Alaric the Goth 23:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I moved the graf after a brief discussion with CJCurrie. The "nomination" fact, for what it's worth, is separated from the court case. If it seems out of place, then, perhaps it does pass the test of being a derogatory "fact" arising from the court case. Alaric the Goth 23:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

My edit
Please do not revert my edit without discussion. There is some concern around about this article, including damaging claims made about the subject of the article. Also, we only had a primary source for this particular claim, which is at least borderline OR. Metamagician3000 13:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Salon article
This might be a useful reference: - just came across it and thought I'd share. Cheers. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The salon.com profile was also published in British Columbia's TheTyee.ca. As salon.com sometimes requires premium access and TheTyee.ca is free, would it be an idea to also include TheTyee.ca link as an additional source? Rachel Marsden's Weird Career MediaCheck by Rebecca Traister. www.TheTyee.ca. Published: April 5, 2007. Accessed: April 30, 2007. Note that an admin did grade this article as a "poor source." Canuckle 16:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The website is a source of unknown quality, not the article. I notice you added links to that site to a few articles. It might be a good idea to stop that in case it looks like spamming. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tip. The Tyee has an article of its own but it doesn't do them any favours in establishing their credibility. Frequency of linking to The Tyee is incidental to some of the BC topics I've been editing recently. Sometimes it's difficult to link to major media like the Vancouver Sun due to online access limits. Cheers! Canuckle 19:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey! Wait a sec. "A few articles??" My quick look over my contributions found 2 articles. This one and Geoff Plant. That results in a spam warning? You may be right to question The Tyee's quality (as I did in flagging BC Legislature Raids for lack of sources) but the author Barb McLintock is an award-winning investigative reporter with significant credibility. And you deleted that one too. We must have gotten off on the wrong tack. Canuckle 21:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I saw an article that used "Alternate link" in the reference list. So I'll do that here. It's not so important but other editors have raised concern about premium content sources. Canuckle 21:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Categorization as a Pundit
Would it be appropriate to add the categories of Canadian political pundits and American political pundits? Ann Coulter as categorized as both a columnist and pundit. Given Marsden's punditry crosses the border, I think both American and Canadian categories could be justified. Canuckle 17:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Taking silence as lack of dissent, I've added her to both American and Canadian political pundits categories. Canuckle 16:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Departure from Red Eye
Is the Post gossip and her denial worthy of notice? It has now reached mainstream media here. I'm leery. Canuckle 21:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Your link to me to a Sun story about hybrid cars. The Sun's search turned up nothing about Marsden so I haven't seen that story but from what I have seen in the other ones, all that is even alleged in the gossip is that she acted strange and was escorted from a building.  Hardly encyclopedic in my opinion even if it were true.  --JGGardiner 22:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops. Sorry. I fixed the link. It is also here. It is just mainstream source (stronger than "according to her website") that she is no longer there and denies strange behaviour. I don't feel the gossip is notable at this point. Canuckle 23:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Le Petit Prince song

 * The following edit should be referenced to a reliable source that identifies what play, what award and when it was performed. The internal link to the Prince article simple restates the following information and does not verify its notability. Quote: "*Political commentator Rachel Marsden composed a song about the Petit Prince which was performed in an award-winning play in Saint Jean sur Richelieu, Quebec." Canuckle 20:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

And Ms Marsden's own website does not constitute a reliable source for the assertion that she is fluently bilingual. John FitzGerald 00:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Is that really notable anyway for a Canadian? --JGGardiner 07:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion
While I support some of the recent changes to give the article a chronological flow, the removal of personal life as a separate section has orphaned her notability as a student at the very end of the article and out of place as part of the recognition section. I propose a re-wording of existing content and sources that keeps her pre-journalism career together in one place. Please tell me what you think. Given the section ordering, one consequence would be that this would give the SFU matter much more prominence at the top of the article than in the past. I think these changes are appropriate but don't want to reignite controversies, re-introduce contested issues or be accused of POV. Here's my suggested change:

Section title: Early life and education

Marsden grew up in the Lower Mainland area of British Columbia.

She was a competitive swimmer in her youth and first came to public prominence due to claims and counter-claims of sexual harassment involving a swim coach at Simon Fraser University. The university’s handling of the matter was controversial and resulted in the departure resignation of SFU’s president John Stubbs and a overhauling of its policies.

After obtaining a degree in biosciences and French from SFU, Marsden attended the British Columbia Institute of Technology. She graduated from its journalism program in 2000.

In 2002, Marsden’s break-up with a boyfriend resulted in criminal charges and she was convicted in 2004 of criminal harassment and given a conditional discharge with one year of probation.

In an unrelated case, in 2004 Marsden was given a conditional discharge with one year of probation for criminal harassment of her boyfriend during a breakup. This case was unrelated to the SFU case. Canuckle 10:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This suggestion has been up for a week now (added July 11 but I forgot to add my sig and date then). If it's so non-contentious I'll add it when I have a moment. Canuckle 23:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That seems good to me. Although I personally wouldn't include the second boyfriend incident at all.  I'm sure it is an important part of her life but doesn't really add much of value to an encyclopedia article.  But I doubt that is consensus and I think that your changes are generally positive.  --JGGardiner 08:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment. The second incident would likely have more detail were WP:BLP not so (by necessity) restrictive. Canuckle 06:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

unsubstantiated claims & restoration
I've reverted the last two edits, the first which removed what referred to as "unsubstantiated claims", and the second in which 70.68.151.228 restored the article to its state prior to 21 December. While I won't presume to speak for 70.68.151.228, it would appear issue is being taken with a piece published in the 21 December 2007 edition of The Toronto Star. I encourage discussion on this matter. Victoriagirl (talk) 22:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I've again reverted an edit which returned the article to its pre-21 December state.
 * In the main, the edits by, and  remove information sourced through a 21 December 2007 Toronto Star article (indeed all mention of this article was removed) and a 29 March 2007 Salon.com feature on Marsden. Also eliminated was a link to a CBC newsmagazine show in which Marsden was featured.
 * Unfortunately,, and  have not yet chosen to participate in this discussion page. That said they appear to be of like mind in their edit summaries (when provided): no allegations please. only charges and convictions (70.68.151.228), undid unsubstantiated claims. just because iti's (sic) in the paper doesn't mean it's true. no charge or conviction = no legitimacy (70.68.151.228), rv to pre-revert war version. i agree, no unsubstantiated allegations or gossip (208.77.91.8), and rv to pre-war version. Agreed - we do not print unsubstantiated allegations when someone has not even been arrested, let alone charged or convicted (Republicon). I take these comments to refer to the Toronto Star news story in question, "Cop claims harassment by the 'Babe for Bush'". The story concerns an ongoing investigation of Marsden by the Ontario Provincial Police. Nowhere in the article, or that found on Wikipedia, is there a claim that she is guilty of the allegations. That said, the investigation of a public figure for possible wrongdoing is indeed newsworthy and appropriate; furthermore, it is anything but unusual.
 * Again, I believe the edit summaries refer primarily to the piece in the Toronto Star. I will not hazard a guess as to what it is that 208.77.91.8 considers "gossip", why the link to the CBC piece was removed, or why it is that information garnered from the Salon article was deleted. Victoriagirl (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll begin by repeating an apology made at Requests for page protection. With this edit I violated, unintentionally, Wikipedia's WP:3RR. I note that  has since reverted this edit. Again, my apologies.


 * In reverting my edit, Republicon made the following edit summary: "rv to version without gossip and unproven allegations. I don't think Wikipedia wants to get sued." in the interest of moving forward, I ask that Republicon will identify this content.


 * At Requests for page protection, Republicon leaves states the following: "Request for reversion and semi-protection of the Rachel Marsden page to the "pre-edit war" version of December 10, 2007. People are posting allegations that are neither proven nor substantiated. Allegations minus a charge, conviction, or even arrest are nothing but gossip and in violation of Wiki standards and practices." Again,what content being referred to in this sentence is not clear. That said, I've assumed in previous posts that the above-mentioned Toronto Star article dealing with an Ontario Provincial Police investigation is the main point of contention. Again, nowhere - not in the Toronto Star, nor in the removed passages from the Wikipedia article - is there a claim that Marsden is guilty of anything.


 * Republicon has written that "Allegations minus a charge, conviction, or even arrest are nothing but gossip and in violation of Wiki standards and practices." I will assume that policies and guidelines are what is being referred to by "standard and practices", and I ask that Republicon cite those being referred to in this instance.


 * Finally, I will disagree that a police investigation of allegations without a charge, conviction or arrest are "nothing but gossip". In fact, even when baseless, they can be integral to an article, as Ralph Goodale and the Canadian federal election, 2006 suggest. Victoriagirl (talk) 20:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)