| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chase Iron Eyes 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 |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on September 3 2014. The result of the discussion was delete. |
| 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NPOV
editThis article stinks of a non neutral point of view. In the main article text it says that he is a convicted felon. Surely he is not the only person to have committed a crime, but I have never seen another person of note described this way unless that is what they were known for by the general public. The personal life and career sections should also be written from a neutral point of view. Does anyone see what I am talking about or am I reading too much into this. ~DesmondEbuwa — Preceding unsigned comment added by DesmondE (talk • contribs) 18:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
- So how is it it fair that Ezra Miller has to suffer the unverified and now debunked claims of Chase Iron Eyes, but Iron Eyes, who is a convicted felon, gets to have immunity? RedEyeKav (talk) 12:23, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
If your goal is to be factual, but unbiased, it is irresponsible to NOT include his criminal record.
editIn making informed decisions, I don't know anyone that wouldn't care to know his criminal record. I am not saying that those things undo any good work he has done since, but to be fair and impartial, people should have all of the information, then they can make an informed decision. Washing this article of any negative information only damages the reputation and dependability of this website. Nmichaelson78 (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Merrick [1]
Neutrality
edittoo many editors are choosing left wing politics over neutrality. Iron Eyes’ claims about Ezra Miller are false. They are libel if published. They were refuted successfully by Tokata Iron Eyes in the tribal court, and across media. Chase never reported his claims to any federal authority so how are they remotely credible? In that case why are they included in this article at all? Worse, why are they included from a heavily biased pov that omits the entire context of Ezra and Tokata, including her credible allegations she was abused at home? Who included the lie that Ezra Miller “flew Tokata to London at 12?” That is pure libel. A whole grpup from Standing Rock visited the Harry Potter set. Tokata was 14 and went with her family, she was never with Ezra Miller, and her family verify she was chaperoned the whole time. So who is using Wikiepedia to lie?
It’s also a public fact Iron Eyes was fed the grooming lie by Lauren Turner, a court verified stalker of Ezra Miller, in 2020. Why is this fact omitted or edited out of this article? It is now public record.
Another point is that Ezra is being wrongly blamed for Tokata’s drug use, in this article, so it’s only fair to scrub that libel and included the actual fact that Tokata independently has her own vices learned at home, including by the verified, documented alcohol and drug use of her own father. False claims are not credible or neutral, they should not be used by wikipedia, even if they are sold to entertainment media. I hope anyone reading Wikipedia for information about Miller understands this site is being used by political zealots and those with a vendetta against Miller to poison public discourse, despite this being strictly against Wikipedia’s aims. RedEyeKav (talk) 12:50, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RedEyeKav: Now that some time has passed, allow me to retort. Firstly, I believe that you have overestimated my own stake in this matter. Yes, the article is on my watchlist, but that is because I added Chase Iron Eyes' electoral stats from when he ran for Congress. Otherwise, I have not written this article. I am not the person who wants to determine who is innocent and who is guilty, who are good guys or bad guys, in the situations described on Iron Eyes' page. Instead of saying "x is innocent of all the accusations against him/her", Wikipedia should state, for example, "charges against x were dropped due to a lack of evidence [insert citation here]". Also, the citation format that you introduced in the edit is insufficient, because there needs to be more detail in the citations than the URLs by themselves. It also seems very weird to vociferously defend Ezra Miller so much, because you can't neglect the fact that Miller has had a multitude of allegations and legal troubles following behind. But somehow this one circumstance is completely false? Weird.
- Anyways, looks like you have been pretty argumentative with other editors, and have been blocked twice. Threatening lawsuits and risking libel is awful form. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 07:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)