Talk:Michelle Wu
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Michelle Wu article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | 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 sourced must 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.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.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 is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Length
editThis article is pretty big. Parts of the section "Relationship with the Boston City Council" make it unnecessarily dense. Then there are three sections on environmentalism. Should we just put that under a general political beliefs/stance section? I think "Policy Positions" would be the best bet, since it's already fairly concise. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 13:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think the "policy positions" is the weakest section. It consists of a bunch of one-off actions or statements presented essentially as standalone paragraphs. Feels like a resume or candidate website. I'm sure a lot of folks do come to Wikipedia to read about a candidate's positions, but IMO, this information is likely better presented within the Mayoralty section where it could instead provide context to her decisions. Grk1011 (talk) 13:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- I meant that was more of where we could consolidate the information. I mean, I guess it doesn't completely matter where it happens. But as it stands, there certainly could be parts of this article that get cut. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 14:33, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- Many political biographies-have dedicated "political positions" sections. SecretName101 (talk) 05:48, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Sources for party invitation
editYet another leading thread started by now-blocked sock
|
|---|
|
She did not apologize for having a racially segregated party. Instead, she apologized because one of her employees accidentally invited white people. https://www.wcvb.com/article/mayor-wu-boston-apology-electeds-of-color-holiday-invitation/46121252 SquirrelHill1971 (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
|
Semi-protected edit request on 14 December 2023
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Controversies
On December 13, 2023 Michelle Wu drew criticism after Wu's aide, Denise DosSantos, unintentionally sent a holiday party invitation to all members of the Boston City Council for an "Electeds of Color Holiday Party," that was originally intended only to include only the non-white members. Fifteen minutes after sending the invitation, Denise DosSantos issued a retraction of the invitation - but only to the white members of the Boston City Council.1 Later that day, Michelle Wu issued a public apology. The criticism centered on the fact that Michelle Wu did not apologize for inviting only non-white members, rather, she apologized for inadvertently sending the invitation to all members of the Boston City Council stating that it was an “honest mistake”. In addressing the controversy, Michelle Wu said that a separate holiday party was planned “for all elected officials”.2
Sources:
1 Parks, Kristine. “Boston mayor defends excluding White people from holiday party”. https://www.foxnews.com/media/boston-mayor-defends-excluding-white-people-holiday-party. Fox News, 2023. Retrieved December 13, 2023.
2 Neysa Alund, Natalie. “Boston Mayor Michelle Wu apologizes for sending 'electeds of color’ holiday party invite to full council”. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/14/boston-mayor-michelle-wu-holiday-party-email-mistake/71916612007/. USA Today 2023. Retrieved December 13, 2023. Navy Brownshoe (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Already done with exception of the requested "Controveries" heading, per WP:CSECTION. The text is in the "Racial equity" section. 18:51, 14 December 2023 (UTC)A. Randomdude0000 (talk)
- Removed it from this article and added it instead to Mayoralty of Michelle Wu, an article which explores her mayoralty at greater length. SecretName101 (talk) 05:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Racist party
editThe racist party she hosted is serious enough to deserve it's own section. Racism is serious and deserves to be more than a small sub note under "Controveries".
I propose updating the page to properly reflect this. 37.66.181.48 (talk) 17:51, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- It's mentioned this has been going on for 10 years. Why everyone is suddenly upset is beyond me. 2600:1700:1B00:15FF:71E5:C1CA:C28A:E3D5 (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- You're confused why having a racial exclusionary party, one that excludes only one group, hosted by a government official, upsets people? Really? 2601:18C:8201:5110:2465:E87F:3013:BD65 (talk) 20:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- It's not relevant to her if it's been going on for 10 years. If you want to cite this as open racism within City of Boston, be my guest. Fact is she did not introduce this racist practice. 2600:1700:1B00:15FF:71E5:C1CA:C28A:E3D5 (talk) 15:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- You're confused why having a racial exclusionary party, one that excludes only one group, hosted by a government official, upsets people? Really? 2601:18C:8201:5110:2465:E87F:3013:BD65 (talk) 20:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think it has been called a "racist party" by reputable sources. This makes sense, as this is certainly not the case. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 21:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed. It's not racist. It's just exclusionary on the basis of race. 2601:18C:8201:5110:2465:E87F:3013:BD65 (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- Would it be racist to hold a party that excludes black people? Exzachary (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- AKA racist. 2600:1700:1B00:15FF:71E5:C1CA:C28A:E3D5 (talk) 15:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed. It's not racist. It's just exclusionary on the basis of race. 2601:18C:8201:5110:2465:E87F:3013:BD65 (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- No.
- 1) It is against Wikipedia's BLP best-practice policies to create dedicated "controversies" sections/subsections. An effort is supposed to be made to fit controversies into the prose of the article itself rather than tacking on a dedicated grievance section.
- 2) It's not likely to ever be noteworthy enough to be placed in her main article. Her main article is supposed to only present a summary of her mayoralty. Mayoralty of Michelle Wu is the article that explores her mayoralty in greater detail/length
- 3) It's a passing controversy at the moment. If it garners greater significance/consequence, it could be worth adding to Mayoralty of Michelle Wu. But at the moment it has not. SecretName101 (talk) 05:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)