The
contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the
Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
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 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 New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
New York City-related articles 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 CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve
New Jersey–related articles to
Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the
discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all
LGBT-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 Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
Adding this sentence is crucial to understanding what she said. She made an accusation that is blatantly false, and it is not original research to cite this fact here.
". This is despite the fact that in 2022 according to the FBI there were over 7 times as many (1,122) hate crimes against Jews than there were against (158) Muslims.[1]"
Truth matters and Wikipedia should pride itself on truth not antisemitism.
Yestyest2000
It is against
WP:SYNTH to be placing "Sarandon said X" from one source versus "Y is the truth" to create the suggestion that Sarandon lied; it's practically a textbook example. --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 08:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)reply
As Nat says above, the disputed content is an example of synthesis. We don't have a source which compares Sarandon's statement with the rates of hate crime, so we should not make the comparison either. If a reliable source draws a comparison between Sarandon's statement and the rate of hate crime in the US, we could consider including it in her bio.
* Sarandon's statement was "There are a lot of people afraid of being Jewish at this time, and are getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country, so often subjected to violence". What allegation is she making? What is the "libel against the Jewish people"?
Burrobert (
talk) 08:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Calling this
WP:SYNTH is false. either way there are articles linking some false numbers making the same point, so I will incorperate that into the article and then we'll see if you still have problems.
I suggest you bring any exact wording here, with citations (from
reliable sources) and gaining consensus prior to attempting to edit in any material concerning this again.
TarnishedPathtalk 10:27, 22 November 2023 (UTC)reply
I've reverted the addition. Twitter is not a RS, the second sentence was classic
WP:SYNTH.
BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:32, 22 November 2023 (UTC)reply
At this point, we have in both the intro and and the body of the article that her representation dropped her after her comments, and that matches what we have in the sources, that X happened after Y. What we don't have is sourcing saying she was dropped because of, due to, in response to those comments. There is no public statement from the agency being quoted. There's probably enough mention to justify including it in the body, but in the introduction? It's not as though we tend to mention representation at all in the intro for major actors, much less a change of representation. I think we should delete that final sentence. Thoughts? --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 17:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)reply
@
NatGertler, I think there's an argument for removing the material in its entirety per
WP:WEIGHT,
WP:DUE and
WP:BLP given she wasn't even doing work for the agency.
TarnishedPathtalk 07:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)reply
The agency was not representing her, is that what you're saying? If so, source? --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 07:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)reply
What I'm saying is that there's no indication in any of the reporting that Sarandon was currently doing any work that they'd gotten for her, or had any upcoming work which came from them. Given how much UTA made this about themselves they would have put that in their press release. This appears to be nothing more than UTA big noting themselves. Even if the material does stay in the article, given that it takes up all of 13 words in the body of the article, there's extremely little argument for it to be lede at all. The amount of space it takes up in the lede (10 words) is almost as much as is take up in the body which is a ludicrous situation and not at all in keeping with
MOS:LEADBIO,
WP:DUE and
WP:WEIGHT.
TarnishedPathtalk 09:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not finding anywhere where UTA "made this about themselves". Doing a quick Google search, I'm not seeing that they did anything but answer press inquiries with the simple statement that they no longer represent Sarandon. Given that
her IMDb listing includes a work in "preproduction", that is a deal which was presumably negotiated through her agent. She is also
in the cast of
a TV series the release of which has been put on pause (for reasons relating to the war but not to Sarandon's comments on it) which is mentioned as a six-part series but could, presumably, have a second season (if ever released.) --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 16:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)reply
The very act of saying they are not representing someone is virtue signalling. There's no other way to interpret it than through the lense of PR. If they didn't want to make it about themselves, they would have decided to not represent her and not told the world about it.
In any case, I'm having a hard time seeing how something which makes up 13 words in the body gets 10 words in the lede.
TarnishedPathtalk 02:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Can you show me where they "told the word about it" rather than answer inquiries? if someone calls you about someone that they think is your client but is a former client, telling them that you no longer represent them is the simple and direct answer, no signaling beyond the facts involved. Had they put out a press release announcing that they were no longer representing her, that might be a different matter, but I have found no sign that they did so. --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 05:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I have made the deletion from the introduction. --
Nat Gertler (
talk) 20:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I think that's sensible. Not everything can be jammed into a lede just because it is the issue of the second. TarnishedPathtalk 23:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)reply