The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)
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.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
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.
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 Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
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 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.
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
Christopher Cadelago (January 20, 2023). "George Santos appears to admit drag queen past in Wiki post". Politico. Retrieved January 20, 2023. In November, a Wiki user named Devmaster88 edited the Wikipedia page for then congressman-elect George Santos (a page separate from the Wiki bio for Anthony Devolder). The user changed the section about Santos' personal life and made edits to his middle name. Around that time another account, georgedevolder22, also made edits to Santos' public Wikipedia page, removing the entire middle name, Anthony Devolder, so that the biography was shortened to George Santos. The identity of the users is not revealed by Wikipedia. But both accounts have subsequently been blocked from the site. Moderators, as part of the ban, wrote that Devmaster88 was "abusing multiple accounts" and that it was likely an extension of Georgedevolder22.
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
This is the part of Wikipedia that constantly makes me feel the need to have someone slap my face!
This story was obviously reported on numerous media. We have numerous sources we can get this story from, but it should be recognized that citations serve a broader purpose than merely allowing the original editor to swear that the information provided was obtained from a reliable source and allowing persons with the requisite permissions to satisfy themselves that the editor didn't just make this stuff up, but also facilitates allowing the general readership to easily obtain more details.
So what sources do we link to? The New York Times, as well as ABC News. These are commercial organizations trying to manage a revenue stream, and thus they restrict or otherwise tend to get in the way of the content. Numerous other sources will let us access the story with somewhat lesser degrees of annoyance. But what is the source we could and should have? How about the press release issued by the U.S. Attorney's Office?
That's not consistent with the alleged purpose of the citations? This source is objectionable because it's a "primary source"? We should all be wary that the Feds will spin the story to make them look good?
Sure, we should be wary of what the government tells us. We should properly be wary of all sources... I'd like to see us make some efforts to find sources that aren't putting up toll gates, but I'd also like it considered that there's a certain degree of blindness in pretending that citations don't serve the dual purpose of confirming the claims made and offering the reader a quick way to obtain greater depth about the story. If that constitutes a fundamental change to the principles of Wikipedia, then please tell me where we need to go to be having that discussion. Fabrickator (talk) 22:50, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Press releases aren't primary sources; we cite them all the time and have a special citation template for them. I think that the Times got cited because its coverage tends to come up high in people's news feeds, much higher than press releases from U.S. attorney's offices, and probably also because, after all, more than a year and a half ago it was the outlet that started this whole sordid story off with its exposé on Santos.
@Daniel Case: Although your response may explain why editors often provide citations for the New York Times, I am suggesting that editors ought to give consideration to whether free access is available to a source. Being an editor can be time-consuming, but over the lifetime of the Wikipedia article, it's likely that the source will be accessed (or attempt to be accessed) numerous times. How much better if those attempts are not restricted to those readers who are signed up to view the NY Times! Fabrickator (talk) 01:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's everyone's thoughts on changing the "Cameo and OnlyFans" section heading to something more general, like "Post-congressional ventures"? Carguychris (talk) 14:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kcmastrpc, ditto WP:PROMO, also WP:UNDUE. How about "Post congressional activities" instead of "ventures"? This could encompass his sentencing. Since his criminal activities were nonviolent, there's a chance he won't go to prison, or at least not for very long; however, it's likely that he will be on probation for years, and will face some sort of ban on political or so-called "charitable" activities. Carguychris (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should be mentioned, but making a section header out of it is WP:UNDUE. If nothing else happens on the OnlyFans front for a few more months, I could see an argument being made to remove it under WP:LASTING, but I think it should stand for the time being (and I didn't intend to go down that rabbit hole). @Horse Eye's Back, NOTNEWS was a sidetrack on my part. After thinking it over some more, I no longer think it applies. Carguychris (talk) 17:50, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like "career", potentially a better fit if he winds up taking a normal job or is placed in some sort of program as part of his probation. Carguychris (talk) 18:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Not needed. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
