Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:Thanks SPECIFICO. We worked for quite some time to find consensus on this matter and it is upsetting to see an editor move in and do so much altering of what we accomplished. This is not the way we hope to be able to write and sustain good Misplaced Pages editing/articles. When we write bios our subjects deserve better treatment. ] (]) 20:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
:Thanks SPECIFICO. We worked for quite some time to find consensus on this matter and it is upsetting to see an editor move in and do so much altering of what we accomplished. This is not the way we hope to be able to write and sustain good Misplaced Pages editing/articles. When we write bios our subjects deserve better treatment. ] (]) 20:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
::{{u|Gandydancer}}, did you think some of my edits were good? ] (]) 01:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
::{{u|Gandydancer}}, did you think some of my edits were good? ] (]) 01:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
:::What you did was similar to having someone make a similar slew of edits to the Emmett Till article or Elizabeth Warren's Pocahantas problems as though you had every reason to "improve" them. Surely you must be aware of how sensitive this article is regarding Franken's charge of sexual misconduct after many years without even a whisper of inappropriate behavior with perhaps the exception of some behavior similar to that which Biden has been accused of. I was so bewildered by your rash of edits that I hardly knew where to begin. Each change you wished to make should have been discussed. I was ever so happy to see SPEC come along and revert you. ] (]) 15:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
It's fairly normal to continue referring to someone as their title after they leave office - President Bush, for example, rather than ex-President Bush. --SarekOfVulcan (talk)18:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
How did they not work, Pvmoutside? ("404" messages from the Internet Archive, perhaps?) One link worked for me when I added it (I didn't check the other at that time); both worked for me just minutes before I asked the question above; both worked for me just minutes ago. I therefore propose adding
* (alfranken.com) as archived by the ] on February 24 2018
* as archived by the Wayback Machine on January 6 2018
usually former senators have their campaign pages and official Senate pages deleted unless they run again. The first page is not his official page, but a PAC page. If you insist on adding it, please identify it as such. The second page I deleted was a wayback calendar with no mention of Franken. Your proposed 2nd page change is better, but the page appears as if he is an active Senator, which he is not. In my opinion, both pages would be better not added, but if you insist, the replacement set is better.....Pvmoutside (talk) 00:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
I've readded them, in slightly reworded form. I believe that we can trust readers of an encyclopedia to realize that what's said in an page archived at Wayback may no longer be true (particularly when many regular, "live" pages say things that are out of date). I don't rate myself as particularly intelligent (and indeed others have rated me as unusually stupid; see my user page for miscellaneous psychiatric evaluations). However, I'd feel that even my limited intelligence were being insulted if given a link described as something like Franken's U.S. Senate website as archived by the Wayback Machine on January 6 2018: does not reflect changes to his status since that time and indeed may not have been up to date even when archived. -- Hoary (talk) 01:53, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
althougb i'd rather see them not there, the link descriptions are better and something i can live with.....Pvmoutside (talk)
Mayer's reporting
An IP editor removed text quoted from the Jane Mayer New Yorker article in sources and disparaged her reporting. I note that her Misplaced Pages article notes nine awards conferred and that she was a finalist for a tenth. Activist (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Edit warring over sexual misconduct accusations??
It seems like there may be some back and forth edit warring over the inclusion of the words inhuman (not really a word) and rightly in the second paragraph of the introduction on the sexual misconduct accusation against sen. franken. Thankfully both words have been removed and just want to a blurb about why I think they shouldn't be included, inhuman is a weird way to frame sexual misconduct as it adds another unnecessary descriptor onto action that are already wrong and rightly assumes that fraken has been convicted of what is being alleged, which he has not. like it or not all of the accusations right now are just that and wikipedia shouldn't take a stand on whether they are right or not. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 03:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Text for Tweeden photo: groping, pretending, hovering, touching, reaching chest/breasts?
Gandydancer, I feel like this line which I had added, "pretending to grope (or possibly actually groping)" accurately reflects the sum of the RS. "Pretending to grope" alone is not what most RS say, but the full quote covers everything.
"A photo shows Al Franken touching Leeann Tweeden’s chest. Many media reports still say he ‘allegedly’ groped her." Washington Post
She had, unlike so many other victims of harassment, hard evidence. This was not a case of her word against his, he said against she said; Tweeden had, via that photo of Franken groping and grinning, the receipts. "Al Franken, That Photo, and Trusting the Women", AtlanticKolya Butternut (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)Kolya Butternut (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Per the Post source you offer, that source also says that that is not the opinion of most news reports. Re the Atlantic, you can as easily find another Atlantic article saying that his hands were "hovering over her". Let's not get into an argument in this Franken bio about whether or not his hands actually touched her or not. Unless you want to pull in numerous sources that give their own version of what happened. Gandydancer (talk) 12:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
@Gandydancer:, yes, we can find many sources saying many things. I'm trying to find language that accurately sums it up with proper weight. From the WaPo source: "Merrill Perlman, a former New York Times copy desk director, explained why she would advise against a flat-out declaration that Franken groped Tweeden:
Since it's a still , we don't know what he did before or after. So the safest thing is to say he touched her chest. We can't assume that Franken squeezed her chest, or moved his hands in a groping movement, or touched her in this one movement and withdrew his hands. "Groping" implies action. The safest and most accurate course is to say that the photo clearly shows him touching her chest with his hands cupped (while mugging for the camera, maybe). That's descriptive of the photo and avoids any journalistic assumption of what the action was.
Many sources say he "touched her chest". The Mayer story says, without quotes, Tweeden "said that it wasn’t until she returned home and received a CD of images from the tour photographer that she saw the image of Franken pretending to grope her while she slept." Maybe we could say he was photographed pretending to grope her breasts while appearing to touch her chest. What do you think? Kolya Butternut (talk) 13:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
According to the skit done on the show he said he was a doctor and would need to "examine" her breasts. It was funny and unfortunately Franken continued with his having fun while she slept, and she did not find it to be funny at all. She felt she was being mocked. She deserved an apology and Franken admitted he was wrong and apologized. Again, more sources than not say he held his hands over her breasts rather than to say he placed them on her breasts. Gandydancer (talk) 13:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is that from a source or your opinion? We would need to evaluate whether more sources said he held his hands over her breasts or actually touched her chest. I'm thinking: On the flight back from the tour, Franken was also photographed pretending to grope her breasts by reaching out to touch her chest while she... It sounds like we may be at an impasse, so we may need a third opinion. Kolya Butternut (talk) 13:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I think reaching out to touch her chest is perfect because it doesn't necessarily mean that he touched her, but would be accurate if he did. Kolya Butternut (talk) 14:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Recent edits reverted
I have undone the recent edits, which appear to go against the NPOV version that was hashed out by many editors over an extended period of time and work. Recent edits also suppress text that reflected Democratic congressional regret RE: Sen. Gillebrand initiative. SPECIFICOtalk14:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks SPECIFICO. We worked for quite some time to find consensus on this matter and it is upsetting to see an editor move in and do so much altering of what we accomplished. This is not the way we hope to be able to write and sustain good Misplaced Pages editing/articles. When we write bios our subjects deserve better treatment. Gandydancer (talk) 20:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
What you did was similar to having someone make a similar slew of edits to the Emmett Till article or Elizabeth Warren's Pocahantas problems as though you had every reason to "improve" them. Surely you must be aware of how sensitive this article is regarding Franken's charge of sexual misconduct after many years without even a whisper of inappropriate behavior with perhaps the exception of some behavior similar to that which Biden has been accused of. I was so bewildered by your rash of edits that I hardly knew where to begin. Each change you wished to make should have been discussed. I was ever so happy to see SPEC come along and revert you. Gandydancer (talk) 15:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
I went over the text very carefully; can you tell me if you noticed any edits which you agreed with? I did include text about Gillibrand's action, did you miss that or did you disagree with the parts I did remove about her? Kolya Butternut (talk) 14:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
SPECIFICO, you mentioned disagreeing with the Gillibrand edits I made. As I said in my edit summary, I felt that the amount of text about Gillibrand was UNDUE, but I felt one line was appropriate in that paragraph. (There is also a line about her at the end of the first section of the assault allegation.) What do you think we need to say about Gillibrand? Kolya Butternut (talk) 17:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
