Talk:David Chipman
Add topic| 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.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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Controversies
[edit]The sentence "Chipman has been criticized for his involvement in the Waco siege" should be removed. Chipman was not involved in the Waco siege and this claim is part of a disinformation campaign on social media."Fact-check: Was ATF nominee David Chipman at the Waco siege of 1993?". Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved 2 June 2021. "Man in Waco rubble image is not Biden's ATF nominee". Associated Press. Retrieved 2 June 2021. The sentence could be amended to read "Chipman has been criticized for his comments on the Waco siege;..."
David has made controversial comments about the Waco siege and Ruby Ridge, one instance is this comment on a Reddit AMA[1]. --Rougetimelord (talk) 05:27, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Creating a separate section for this "controversy" would violate WP:CSECTION. A Reddit thread is not an WP:RS. KidAd • SPEAK 05:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Not including this topic blatantly violates WP:NPOV. However, I concede on a Reddit comment not being a reliable source. Rougetimelord (talk) 20:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
References
Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2021
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The sentence "Chipman has been criticized for his involvement in the Waco siege" should be removed or modified. Chipman was not involved in the Waco siege, and this claim is part of a disinformation campaign on social media."Fact-check: Was ATF nominee David Chipman at the Waco siege of 1993?". Austin American-Statesman. Retrieved 2 June 2021. "Man in Waco rubble image is not Biden's ATF nominee". Associated Press. Retrieved 2 June 2021. The sentence could be amended to read "Chipman has been criticized for his comments on the Waco siege;..." XTDVM (talk) 17:45, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Two separate things here. It's clear he's not at Waco: that's fine, and I've reworded the sentence to make it sound less like that. The issue here is whether his Reddit AMA thread "controversy" is noteworthy enough for inclusion. It's worthy to note that the source is Newsweek (original here), which has an okay-ish track record of reliability (per WP:RSP). A quick Google search turns up hits in two unreliable sources (New York Post, Federalist) and one okay-ish one (National Review). I don't see a solid reliable source indicating that it is a noteworthy-enough controversy at all, so I propose yanking it out. Pinging KidAd and leaving edit request open for further comments. ◢ Ganbaruby! (talk) 18:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the courtesy ping, but I don't have much to add here. I approve of the current wording. KidAd • SPEAK 19:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Regarding the reddit thread, while AMA's do supposedly involve verification of the interviewee, potentially making it a primary source on the same level as any other subject interview, in this case I believe only the commentary by Chipman would be sourced, not interpretation of it (so whether or not what he said is controversial in the first place). I agree that Reddit alone is not enough here, especially given Reddit does not have the best reputation for being reliable. A S U K I T E 18:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Already done There seems to be an acceptance of Ganbaruby's updated text. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:49, 18 June 2021 (UTC)