Talk:Lucie Castets

Well, for anyone seeking to learn of her political stance regarding anything but socio-economic issues, this page is no help at all, sadly... 176.59.23.39 (talk) 06:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to add such information, based on reliable published sources. Sandstein 06:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Revert of sourced information

This revert retrieved information that was duly sourced by two national medias in two different countries (Le Temps 1 and Marie FranceI think we should keep it ). Nattes à chat (talk) 10:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Had there been some sort of permanent suppression of her bio for political reasons that might have been noteworthy, but the temporary deletion while sufficient info was gathered to show her notability doesn't strike me as a particularly important aspect of her laïf. :) -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 11:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

@Nattes à chat, not all sourced information is important enough to be included, see WP:IINFO. A biography should include only such information as is important for understanding the life of a person. The fact that she briefly did not have a French Wikipedia page because of Wikipedia's internal processes is not a fact that is important to Lucie Castet's biography. Sandstein 11:24, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Well I think it is because the fact that people could not find information about her on the French wikipedia when everybody was looking for it has been evoked by a seerious swiss (outside of France) newspaper. What is not important is who deleted the article, or why it was deleted - but Wikipedia is a service of public utility and people needed that information in French. Nattes à chat (talk) 13:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

If that is so, then not in this article. That is more suited to French Wikipedia than to Lucie Castets. Sandstein 15:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

the fact that the French article of the subject was summarily deleted on French, as reported in reliable sources is encyclopedic. and rest assured the emotional labor required to overcome bias in French and English is a topic of reliable sources, as with Talk:Donna_Strickland; we can add this case to the List of Wikipedia controversies. apparently, it is not a problem for Pierre-sur-Haute_military_radio_station#Censorship_on_Wikipedia_and_unwanted_attention. but I understand why you might want to suppress that unflattering fact here. --Boundsolar (talk) 11:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Strong POV

This new article seems more like a political piece with a strong POV than a WP article. For a few examples: the article repeatedly claims that Macron "refuses" to nominate her. While that POV is common on the far-left of French politics, the fact is that the alliance who nominated Castets for PM has nothing even close to a parliamentary majority. That fact is never mentioned. The article also made a great deal of Castets being on the board of some organisation called "National Observatory of the Far Right". That sounds very official, yet a look at the references revealed it to a rather obscure organisation with only a WordPress site. These are just a few examples of the strong POV coming through. I know this is a new article, but WP articles should respect WP:NPOV. Jeppiz (talk) 21:30, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe "refused" is an inaccurate term here, it's not as loaded as you seem to make it out to be, it's not relevant that the coalition lacks a parliamentary majority, they still suggested her and Macron did refuse to nominate her, there's no other reasonable way to phrase that without making it either sound unencyclopædic or even more loaded. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 14:32, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I've rephrased this part. Macron did not "refuse" to nominate Castets in the sense that he said something like "I will not nominate her", but rather he waved the issue away witout even mentioning her. Sandstein 15:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

He said multiple time he doesn't want to nominate her. ProudWatermelon (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)