Talk:Sigal Chattah

Posts on Gaza

There's a disagreement on whether or not to include Chattah's comments on Palestinians in the Tom Alexandrovich section. My opinion is that the connection to Alexandrovich is tenuous. Al-Jazeera reported that these posts were discovered during the Alexandrovich arrest, then deleted, but that's it. There is ostensibly a connection to the public perception of the Alexandrovich case as Alexandrovich and Chattah are Israeli, but Al-Jazeera does not explicitly draw that connection. However, there could be a section for Chattah titled Political Views and a subsection for the Gaza War, or Palestine. She has other political views that could be included (this article names a few: https://nevadacurrent.com/2022/05/20/chattah-black-spar-in-republican-ag-primary/), and there's another source focusing on her support for Israel. I think her comments could fit there.

@NathanBru @98.209.55.205@Driftingdrifting @Thetwentythird @Heresson

Truthnope (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

The connection is drawn by several public figures, political figures and media outlets altogether. Even in the worst-case scenario, the connection has sparked public outrage and i believe that it is worthy of being mentioned. More so, the twitter (X) account that Chattah posted the calls for violence against palestinians on was deleted as a result of the alexandrovich arrest putting the spotlight on it. The naming is a bit of a hot potato though. "Political Views" alone works but can be whitewashing. Ideas on naming sensibly but adhering to WP:NOR? Thetwentythird (talk) 15:15, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

If we're going by reliable sources, I've only seen the Al-Jazeera article, which briefly mentions the tweets, and the Axios article, which mentions Chattah being Israeli. There is coverage on social media, but that's WP:UGC. The only connection to Alexandrovich is that Chattah's social media history was looked at after she received scrutiny for the Alexandrovich case.

Articles for major politicians usually have a section called either Political views, Political positions, or Views. It's rarer for someone like Chattah, who doesn't have a long political career, but she has run for Nevada Attorney General and so has discussed some political positions. Her comments on Gaza could go in a subsection there- I don't think they merit a section on their own. Truthnope (talk) 09:43, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Since the issue concerns acting on behalf of an Israeli official, it is obvious that Chattah's attitude towards, and clear committment to, Israel is relevant for this issue. And the clearly racist and even genocidial remarks about some nation would deserve a mention on this person's Wiki even if they did not concern this issue. Nathan Bru's attempts to remove any mention of her stance on Palestinians/Israel are a form of political censorship and it's hard not to assume they are due to him being, as he states on his own Wiki page, supporter of Republican party, to which Chattah had many links. The issue where exactly should her comments be listed is of secondary importance, but they do show the context of her decision concerning Alexandrovitch, so personally I believe they should be mentioned there.Heresson (talk) 01:05, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Try to avoid casting WP:ASPERSIONS on other editors. I imagine that a large number of American editors identify with one political party or another, but that doesn't mean that they are all engaging in partisanship when editing an article about politics. If you have content disagreements with another editor, then stick to discussing the content on the talk page.

If we're going by the Al-Jazeera article, they never explicitly draw a connection between Chattah's tweets and the Alexandrovich case. They only say that the tweets were uncovered because of the backlash. I think that including the tweets in the Alexandrovich section to suggest that her stance on Israel-Palestine affected her handling of the Alexandrovich case would be a case of WP:SYNTH. Wikipedia can't just draw the connection between the two facts themselves, a reliable source would have to do so.

Again, I think this would fit better in a subsection on political views about Palestine.

Truthnope (talk) 18:41, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I am not attempting political censorship, merely looking over the articles, and seeing an absence of strong connection between her past statements and this case. NathanBru (talk) 02:25, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Great. Then I'll add this info in a separate issue. Since your problem was including this in Alexandrovich part of the article, you should have no problem with that - right? And even if that's the case, simply move the text into your prefered space, and do not delete it. Moreover, the claim of lack of connection of this issue with Alexandrovich case is peculiar. Where did the negative comments on Palestinians come from but attachement to Israel? And connection to Israel is quite important for the case of Alexandrovich.Heresson (talk) 14:30, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Why do you think he keeps deleting this information, then? Heresson (talk) 14:24, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Look, even now, he deleted the info, instead of correcting the formatting... Why oh why?Heresson (talk) 01:46, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Nathan Bru first deleted this info because he claimed it does not fit the subsection. Then because it was not formatted well. Now because he claims the info "does not deserve a separate section" and "is not covered by media enough." It is quite clear he is just making excuses to censor Wikipedia. If he does it again, I will report him. Since he alleged there is not enough news coverage (as if it was a valid point), I found another news site that comments upon her attitude towards Palestinians. And since he alleged that her comments on Palestinians do not deserve a section of their own, I expanded the section and changed the topic of it to a broader one, to her political views. He is free to add any stuff he wants there relevant to this section. But if he reverts my edits one more time, I will report him. Heresson (talk) 13:00, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

There is nothing that would need to be reported, and I will not back down in the face of a keyboard warrior. Your edits were not of high quality and because I am a nice Wikipedia editor, I chose to fix your egregious errors and mistakes. It is always best to assume the best in others, which I will be forced to do in your case, even when my kind words are not reciprocated in return. Have a blessed day. NathanBru (talk) 23:14, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Interim USAO Nevada Sigal Chattah.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2025 (UTC)