From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ethnicity

I’m noticing, in a picture of her with other far right Republicans, that her skin is darker. Does anyone know her racial/ethnic background? Skysong263 ( talk) 15:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Yea, it's called tanning. Boebert is as white as white can be. Zaathras ( talk) 21:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC) reply
Is she not of Belgian origin? 76.64.181.63 ( talk) 01:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply
Since like 95% of Belgium is either Flemish or Walloon, not sure what the point of the question is. Zaathras ( talk) 02:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Jayson Boebert's arrest on January 10, 2024

I see some back-and-forth edits about whether or not to include this incident, and we should discuss it. I almost added it over the weekend when we knew police were called and investigating, and I'm glad I didn't at that point because the story we have now with Jayson's arrest is different from what he had told police. But now, we have more information on what happened, including Lauren's role in it. Is it DUE for inclusion in Lauren's biography? Here's a source from January 7 with incomplete information and a cite from today with more content. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 21:35, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply

It's contentious material that involves criminal accusations and probably shouldn't be included until there is consensus. My overall sentiment is that it's WP:UNDUE since the altercation was primarily between Boebert's family (one of whom most likely falls under WP:BLPCRIME), with police corroborating that Lauren appears to have not physically assaulted anyone. (per: Police on Wednesday said Jayson's Boebert's allegations Lauren Boebert punched him were "unfounded." "Officers observed no marks or injury on Jayson Boebert to corroborate he had actually been assaulted,") Kcmastrpc ( talk) 21:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
It involved him trying to pursue criminal charges against her, so I most certainly think it belongs. Speakfor23 ( talk) 21:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, it's a confrontation that directly involves her and her behaviors are very relevant to her career. On the other hand, she didn't punch him as he alleged, and may not have acted inappropriately in this case. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 21:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I think due coverage is no coverage; we're not a tabloid. Claims against the subject herself were recanted and investigation dropped more or less immediately. As a reminder, WP:BLP requires use to use greatest care in material regarding living persons. VQuakr ( talk) 22:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC) reply
What is remarkable is the pattern of such incidents and controversies about public conduct that surround Boebert. We would need sources that discuss that, so as to make clear that WP is not the crime blotter or a conveyor of insignificant spectacle. SPECIFICO talk 00:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree with VQuakr here. So far this seems to mostly reflect badly on Jayson vs Lauren. As such it should stay out per BLPONE. He is only notable because he was married to her. Springee ( talk) 00:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC) reply
The first incident is little more than Jayson being drunk and disorderly in a restaurant, and him intentionally trying to get publicity for his private dispute with Lauren. Nothing to say about Lauren herself. The second incident involves Jayson physically attacking an unidentified male relative while drunk. It seems to be more serious (as Jayson was armed during the fight), but Lauren was not even present. Dimadick ( talk) 15:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
IMO we should probably start being careful with regards to WP:BLPCRIME here, even if it is a talk page. This dude is only notable for being the ex-spouse of a Congress member. Kcmastrpc ( talk) 15:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I concur with not including this. The Denver Post (not a tabloid as asserted in the undo) reporting noted the incident only and was a fair citation, but given that little was known at the time of the originally cited Denver post article, and in the end it was Jayson who was charged, that incident is not relevant to Boebert’s career and in the public interest of voters. OriEri ( talk) 00:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Filing for, and dropping of, restraining order

While details of the incident discussed above might not be relevant to Boebert, I think the fact that she filed a restraining order against Jayson as a result of the incident and then dropped the restraining order after arriving at "Strict Agreements" should be relevant to Boebert. See proposed text. Up the Walls ( talk) 03:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree and feel that this restraining order is notable given the accuser/subject is a sitting member of the US Congress. Balon Greyjoy ( talk) 03:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Everything Boebert does makes news headlines because she’s a controversial figure, however, there are a number of reasons why we shouldn’t include every single inconsequential occurrence especially when they’re materially moot. Obtaining and then dropping a restraining order is borderline mundane and meandering into tabloid journalism — there is nothing encyclopedic about it. Can you tell me why it will matter in 10 years, let alone 10 days? Kcmastrpc ( talk) 06:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply
This seems to rather obviously fail the WP:10YT. Should be omitted. VQuakr ( talk) 06:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply
oh the drama. we are not TMZ. skip it. soibangla ( talk) 06:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply
As I said the first time, we're not the Boebert Police Blotter, we do not need to document every legal motion filed by the subject. Esp. as this one was filed then withdrawn 30 days later, thus having no consequence to her or his life. Zaathras ( talk) 11:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

foreign policy: the escalation of the war tensions between Russia and Ukraine that started in late 2021.

The phrase "the escalation of the war tensions between Russia and Ukraine that started in late 2021." is pretty long to use as anchor text and is confusingly circumspect. Maybe something like "opposes U.S. intervention in the Russian invasion of Ukraine." would be better. Uhoj ( talk) 14:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Category:American critics of Islam

@ Objective3000 could you please elaborate what in the article text supports this cat? Additionally, it's unclear to me what this category is even supposed to be, it appears to be a discriminatory list of people who've denounced Islamic Terrorism at some point. Kcmastrpc ( talk) 14:43, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The entire section: Lauren_Boebert#Comments_on_representatives_of_other_religions O3000, Ret. ( talk) 14:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The aforementioned section is political mudslinging. Additionally, Criticism of Islam would be the closest sister category since American Critics of Islam doesn't exist; and Boebert's trolling of Omar doesn't necessarily rise to the level of bigotry outlined in the related article. I digress though, we can let other editors chime in. Kcmastrpc ( talk) 14:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
As it is, Category:American critics of Islam has a lot of political mudslingers. Shouldn't that sort of category be for scholarly criticism? That might be a BLP/N issue. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 14:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
List of critics of Islam also exists, and many of the names in the category I'm opposed to aren't in this article either (including Boebert). I tend to agree though, this may be something that should be brought to a noticeboard for broader discussion. Kcmastrpc ( talk) 15:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
KC, these cats are all lists of articles. Not articles. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I understand, I presume that categories are usually attached to an article, or at least contextualized in some way; however, Category:American critics of Islam lacks either of these characteristics, so I'm stretching to find some sort of relation to provide context of what it's purpose actually is. Emphasis on "stretching". :) Kcmastrpc ( talk) 15:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Actually it fits quite well as it stands. As Muboshgu says, the list appears to be a list of mudslingers, not scholarly critics. Alas most critics of Islam probably are mudslingers and the article text suggests she is one. I haven't seen her write any scholarly articles on Islam. Should such a list exist? I'm ambivalent. Never really warmed to the idea of cats. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:26, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Could be. There are 151 links in that cat. She would seem to fit as a mudslinger. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Per CATREL a category of mudslingers should probably be deleted. Springee ( talk) 15:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm no expert on cats. But CATREL doesn't appear to apply. That speaks to subjects who have publicly self-identified with a religious belief. Few in this cat have publicly stated they are followers of Muhammad. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:45, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
From CATREL: "This may include other categories with similar issues, such as Category:Critics of religions and Category:Conspiracy theorists, and other such categories." I would take critics of Islam to be similar to critics of religion. Springee ( talk) 16:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Well, she appears to have self-identified as a critic of Islam like others in the cat, as a Congressperson she is notable, and RS have covered her criticisms. I don't see anything requiring authorship of scholarly works. Whether the cat itself should exist is for another arena. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 16:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
To which I would point to BLPCAT and not defining. I think there is enough concern that this recent change should be reverted. Springee ( talk) 17:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't see a BLPCAT problem. Defining applies to advocates of religions. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 18:18, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Per BLPCAT, Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its verifiable reliable sources.. Additionally, per WP:COPDEF, Defining – Biographical articles should be categorized by defining characteristics. As a rule of thumb for main biographies this includes the reason(s) for the person's notability;. Some political mudslinging is hardly defining as the CAT in question would suggest. If the claim is Boebert always is associated with mudsligning then "critics of Islam" isn't really the correct category. Springee ( talk) 21:33, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
This seems like a poor CAT in this case. Categories are supposed to be defining. This seems more incidental (see wp:BLPCAT and wp:CATREL) Springee ( talk) 15:34, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Lauren_Boebert&oldid=1231171625"