Jump to content

Talk:Fatima Payman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Persian/Arabic script in infobox

[edit]

I have looked through , as was recommended to me by User: Y. Dongchen (advocate of script in infobox) and discovered that none of the major politicians (i.e. Dai Le, Jenny Leong, Mehreen Faruqi etc) feature native script in their infobox. I had already removed the script however a fellow editor had an issue with it so it would be better for the larger Fatima Payman editing community to give their opinion on this unique matter DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of any definitive styling rule of whether to put the native names of people in infoboxes or the lede.
In the lead only:
In the infobox only:
Both:
Hence, my opinion is that there isn't one particular way to be necessarily merited over any other. Y. Dongchen (talk) 11:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I would just like to note that it may be different styling in the Australian based articles as compared to the articles of overseas, as per the difference in WP:AUP. For example, all of the articles you had listed above that have it in the infobox, or both, are international articles, and not articles being overseen by WP:AUP. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the quick reply. I am not familiar with that Wikiproject and will take a look. Are you referring to different styling for some Australia-specific templates? The template used here is "officeholder". Y. Dongchen (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up: So I did a few rough searches using PetScan. These are two biographies which I identified to be using "native_name". They are both written in the Australian political context and included in that Wikiproject.
Jason Li
Pierre Yang
So it seems that the Australian editors largely act quite similarly to "overseas" editors of the aforementioned articles. Y. Dongchen (talk) 12:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed ,script is not necessary. I don't see any added value. Gofteand (talk) 01:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can also add to examples Anne Aly (Egypt born) which doesn't have native script in infobox Gofteand (talk) 04:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If someone else also wants the non-Latin writing to be taken out of the infobox, let me know and I'll move it into the lede. Y. Dongchen (talk) 05:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think a necessary consensus has been found, I will remove it from the info box but absolutely go ahead and put it in the lead DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the initiative. I see that it's less common in the Australian context. I'm adding it to the lead. Y. Dongchen (talk) 08:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. For reference, I have emulated the same foreign-language name style as applied to http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez — before the date of birth in the parentheses. Y. Dongchen (talk) 09:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request (area belonging to "contentious topics")

[edit]

Request due to objection from a contributor regarding my latest edit (as a non-extended-confirmed editor). See User_talk:Y._Dongchen.

  • What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):
    −
    Labor MP [[Anne Aly]], who had often disagreed with party positions regarding the Gaza conflict, said in an interview that she did not agree with Payman's approach. Referring to Payman's abstention on Labor's proposed amendment to a Greens motion calling for [[International recognition of the State of Palestine|recognition of a Palestinian state]], Aly said "I choose to do things in a way I think will make a material difference on the ground to people in Palestine. Fatima chooses to do it her way". Payman said her choice to abstain on Labor's amendment and to vote for the final Greens motion was consistent with Labor's platform which endorsed a [[two-state solution]] and made Palestinian recognition "an important priority". Aly said that Payman "could have voted for [the Labor amendment] if she held Labor values".
    		+
    Labor MP [[Anne Aly]], who had often disagreed with party positions regarding Gaza, said in an interview that she did not agree with Payman's approach, commenting that "I choose to do things in a way I think will make a material difference on the ground to people in Palestine. Fatima chooses to do it her way". Aly pointed to Payman's abstention on the party's proposed amendment to the Greens motion. Payman had defended her choice to vote for the final motion without the amendment that recognition of a Palestinian state occur as part of a "just" peace process, saying it was consistent with Labor's platform endorsing a two-state solution and regarding recognition as "an important priority". Aly said that Payman "could have voted for [the amendment] if she held Labor values".
  • Why it should be changed:
    • Payman's votes in parliament and the motion for which she voted were already laid out in the preceding paragraphs. It is extraneous to re-emphasise the content of the Greens motion.
    • I think the existing passage is not a very faithful representation of the source. As much as I sympathise with and belong to the peace movement, it is not our role to minimise e.g. criticism of Payman that is present in a source. The essence of Aly's comments to ABC is about Payman stepping out of line with the party, which does not seem well-captured by the current formulation.
    • "Palestinian recognition" to "recognition of a Palestinian state": Labor's official position is ambiguous as to which entity shall ultimately constitute Palestine, so I think the latter is preferable to "Palestinian recognition".

Y. Dongchen (talk) 07:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some comments:
  • The source says "... has herself often deviated from the party's line on the Gaza conflict ...".
  • The earlier paragraph does not mention a Greens motion. It says "On 25 June 2024, Payman crossed the floor to vote in favour of a resolution .... ". We would need to make clear that the motion came from the Greens. We could then drop the unnecessary "calling for recognition of a Palestinian state".
  • We should avoid the term "pointed to". It is similar to the term "pointed out" which is discouraged based on policy at WP:words to watch. I think "referring to" is better.
  • "two-state solution" and "recognition of a Palestinian state" should be wiki-linked.
  • I think we should avoid the phrase "defended her choice". The source says "has maintained her choice". In cases like these the most neutral term is "said" as mentioned in the policy linked above. So "Payman said her choice to abstain on Labor's amendment ... ".
  • The source does not mention "without the amendment that recognition of a Palestinian state occur as part of a "just" peace process" when reporting Payman's statement that her actions were consistent with Labor policy. A good way of covering the Labor amendment would be to say what it was and to say that Payman abstained when it was put to a vote.
  • We have included criticism of Payman from four Labor politicians, including the party leader. If this is not enough, we could mention that "Labor Party rules require all elected members to vote for the party's agreed position on all parliamentary matters, unless the caucus decides a free "conscience" vote is allowed", which is in the ABC source.
  • "recognition of a Palestinian state" is fine with me. Burrobert (talk) 15:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. This is on hold until consensus can be reached, feel free to continue the discussion here or link to it if elsewhere. ASUKITE 15:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fatima_Payman&oldid=1236602848"