This article was nominated for deletion on May 17, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.
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 sourcedmust 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 within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
IMO the incident where someone referred to DeMaio as "Mary" on Scott Peters' blog is too trivial to include here. It was recently deleted by User:Mcd51 and restored with additional references by User:RightCowLeftCoast. However, all of the references are from last May, when it happened - in other words the incident had no lasting significance. We've kept it in the article for six months but there has been no further mention of it in the news; clearly it was a one-day thing. I believe it should be removed per UNDUE and NOTNEWS. --MelanieN (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
While it was a single event, it did receive significant coverage itself (nationwide), including the Washington Times, The Daily Caller, & Daily Kos, National Review, and Breitbart.com (August). It can be reduced in size from two sentences to one, if it helps balance if that helps UNDUE concerns. Perhaps it belongs in the DeMaio article instead, as it is whom the language was directed at?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:38, 20 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
It definitely does NOT belong in the DeMaio article. If it is about anybody, it is about Peters, on whose blog (but without whose input) the comment was made. Still, I don't believe a single mention by various media makes the incident important enough to include. (Most of the national media you name, with the exception of Kos, are right-wing sources which would be eager to give publicity to anything that makes a Democrat look bad; I give more credence to the reporting by local TV stations.) This wasn't even anything that Peters himself did, and it clearly had no lasting impact and did not affect the election. --MelanieN (talk) 20:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I see that User:Stepshep has removed it. It looks to me like we now have three !votes to remove it - Mcd51, myself, and Stepshep - vs. one !vote to keep it - RightCowLeftCoast. So I would say the current consensus is to leave it out. --MelanieN (talk) 19:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, here's another !vote to leave it out, certainly until someone provides more argument addressing the UNDUE and lasting-impact issues. JesseW, the juggling janitor 07:37, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
