Talk:Andrea Natale

This article should not be deleted, but should be expanded

Natale was fine with this article's existence for many years while he was using it as a place to record his achievements. There is no need to remove it now. However, more recent details about Natale's life and career should be included, e.g.: https://www.theroot.com/white-doctor-claims-his-daughter-was-attacked-in-baltim-1845063768 --AndreaNatale (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I am new to wiki but believe content in the Root article link (7) in Personal Life is inflammatory and biased and should be removed. Examples include: "some white man in Texas" “what fresh white foolishness is this?” Nine references to white when regarding race. It's not a quality reference and does not appear to be actually cited in the section despite being the first reference used. The other references have all of the details that are in the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:151D:290:B0C7:D92B:C48B:C17A (talk) 18:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Cool it with the edits

There’s an objective statement of what happened. No need to say he’s racist - the facts speak for themselves. 71.244.250.35 (talk) 05:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andrea Natale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131228010223/http://www.issawiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Andrea_Natale_(professor),_United_States to http://www.issawiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Andrea_Natale_(professor),_United_States

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:50, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Controversy

As noted in my revert per BLP, the predominant opinion on the RSN was that The Root should not be used for controversial BLp matters. [1]. Do not restore this material without getting consensus either here or on the RSN that this single sourcing is adequate for such a statement. --Slp1 (talk) 01:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I will add that there is no rush for this. Some more mainstream, clearly reliable sources may report this story in the next few days...It is much better to wait for them Slp1 (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

How is The Root (magazine) not mainstream, other than your apparent dislike of it? I'd hardly consider a 2 person discussion a consensus about the reliability of this source. Praxidicae (talk) 01:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

−

I don’t know what you are talking about. There are way more than 2 people discussing at RSN and multiple editors/administrators saying that it was not suitable for controversial Blp statements. That is the consensus to date, and that is what you need to change if you want this in. As I said above, I think there is probably good reason to believe that in a few hours or days there will be a clearly reliable Source. I strongly suggest you revert and just wait till that happens. There is no rush. And I will help look. But there is a rush to take poorly sourced material in BLPs so if you don’t do so soon, I will remove it myself and ask for further help on ANI as I need to go to bed. Slp1 (talk) 01:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It has since been covered, as noted below, by The Baltimore Sun and Yahoo. What more do you need, a soliloquy and an intro to admin 101? Praxidicae (talk) 02:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You may have heard of edit conflicts? And that going to ANI to get action is the opposite of Involved! Anyway good luck to you..Slp1 (talk) 02:10, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

And now Justin Fenton of The Baltimore Sun, who is a more than well respected and Pulitzer nominated journalist has published pieces about this which Yahoo has written about. Praxidicae (talk) 01:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Perfect. It is exactly what I thought would happen! Patience is a virtue in these cases! Use that source and you are good to go.Slp1 (talk) 02:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)