Talk:Kay Granger

Dallas Express as a source?

The source for the allegation that Kay Granger is currently in memory care is a “pink slime” website that uses the name of a newspaper that quit publishing. (https://www.texasobserver.org/the-dallas-express-your-go-to-source-for-right-wing-astroturf-news/) Kay Granger may be in memory care, but the two sources I’ve seen are both roght-wing astroturf. 50.47.139.101 (talk) 01:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't see any ideological angle to this coverage. And using a very generic name someone else has abandoned hardly matters. The fact of her last recorded vote is solid for sure. Her abandonment of her office is, I suppose, more important than where she's living. More to come?

I've left the factual bits and commented out the memory unit and that source. Better to be careful. Rutsq (talk) 02:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

She participated in this event in mid-November so it's probably an example of a sudden retirement since she appears alert and aware in these images. Nate • (chatter) 04:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, alertness and awareness aren’t really things you can comprehensively assess through photos. Individuals with dementia can have relatively intact language and observation faculties while still having debilitating issues with memory and other areas of cognitive function compelling assisted care (not sure how to link it but you may look up the MOCA exam to learn more if I am being unclear). All we seem to know for sure at this stage is that she hadn’t voted for anything in the 6 months leading up to her retirement and this ceremony seems to be the only event she had been photographed attending in that timespan. Additionally, if you look at her social media profile, there are several instances where Representative Granger seems to be posting the same things over and over again, suggesting the progressive deterioration of her mental capacity over time. I am not a Wikipedian so I will defer to the authorities on this matter and refrain from editing the page. However, as someone with experience working in memory care facilities, I do think her disappearance and reported admission could warrant a subheading at the minimum as it is a noteworthy event in her political career and more than likely had a significant impact on her ability to perform her duties in congress. 32.213.234.170 (talk) 08:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I checked this today and find not one single reliable source carrying the story. Where it is on websites that are not obvious bollocks (e.g. msn), it's scraped content attributed elsewhere, and elsewhere from there, and so on. I am, to put it mildly, skeptical. Guy (help! - typo?) 12:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Let's wait for verification. In particular, the word "disappearance" is far too strong for someone who clearly made an appearance in November, whatever her mental state at the time. Rutsq (talk) 12:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

It's been confirmed by the New York Post. https://nypost.com/2024/12/22/us-news/missing-texas-rep-kay-granger-found-in-memory-care-unit-report/ Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 16:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The New York Post isn't a reliable source, per WP:NYPOST. David O. Johnson (talk) 20:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Wanted to note the recent edit, which included the previously removed WCBM source as well as Newsweek, did not contain any additional "confirmation." Both of those sources relied entirely on the dubious Dallas Express story. I agree above with it being a "pink slime" site, and the story itself also presents some issues — it peddles mostly in rumors and the sole "confirmation" would be a HIPAA violation. Also worth noting is that its author is himself a political operative.173.175.200.238 (talk) 18:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

also worth mentioning that the Dallas Express CEO, Chris Putnam, ran against Granger in the 2020 primary, so there are definitely bias issues at play 173.175.200.238 (talk) 17:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

"Missing Since July 2024"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The NY Post claimed that she has been missing since July and was found in a memory care facility.

https://nypost.com/2024/12/22/us-news/missing-texas-rep-kay-granger-found-in-memory-care-unit-report/

Whether she was truly missing or not, apparently she has missed a number of tight votes and her office has not been answering calls. This article seems to gloss over her not running for reelection. MyIP19216811 (talk) 16:49, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The NY Post is one crap publication using another, and that's ur source.

I don't see any think her decision not to run should be in the summary. I'll add it. Rutsq (talk) 17:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree re NY POST, but many sources, including the TV STATION in my recent edit, confirmed this, and even a simple Google search of her name will confirm she went missing and turned up in an elder care home. I'm not biased, here, as I'm a Conservative Republican, but either way, here's my cite to verify (below). Was my edit reversed? I can't tell as I see various versions upon review and refresh.

https://www.google.com/search?q=kay+granger 172.56.72.166 (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Please help. Another unregistered editor is vandalising and now says NEWSWEEK is also an unreliable source. Observe:

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Kay_Granger&action=history

107.123.37.79 (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

This has been reported in many mainstream news outlets. We should take our jobs as editors seriously and do our research! Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/22/kay-granger-republican-congresswoman-memory-care 76.189.135.48 (talk) 18:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The Guardian, as far as I'm aware, is a highly reliable source. I support including this in the article. The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 20:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

yeah, they added the Dallas Morning News as a source for some of their info. it was problematic when it was only quoting the Dallas Express 173.175.200.238 (talk) 21:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

And this one should be included too: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/22/kay-granger-assisted-living-facility-texas-00195837 The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 20:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I am an unregistered editor, but see here.

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Kay_Granger#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_22_December_2024

I put in a request for your link to be added. Good catch, Hungry 🐈‍⬛🐈🐱🦁🐱Cat! 107.123.37.79 (talk) 21:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. The Last Hungry Cat (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:NEWSWEEK has been considered less-than-reliable by the English Wikipedia community for some time now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

also, as noted in the above section, Newsweek did not "confirm" anything. here is what they wrote, entirely attributed to the original source:

After multiple attempts were made by the Dallas Express to locate Granger, a reporter at the newspaper received a tip that she had been staying at a memory care facility after being found lost and confused while wandering through her neighborhood.

According to the newspaper, Dallas Express reporters who visited the facility to confirm Granger's residency and inquire about how she planned to vote on the recent spending bill were not permitted to speak with the congresswoman.

Employees, however, confirmed that Granger was living in the facility with assistant executive director of the facility, Taylor Manziel, acknowledging that "this is her home," the Dallas Express reported.

173.175.200.238 (talk) 19:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

It may be neutral to confirm that a) she missed a bunch of votes this year, b) she is still the rep and getting paid until the new guy comes in January as she has not resigned. MyIP19216811 (talk) 19:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

OK, but The GUARDIAN and MSN are certainly not "in the bag" for Republicans or otherwise biased. See my semi-protected edit request for clarification. 172.56.72.166 (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

as far as i can tell no one has said those outlets are biased. however, their coverage relies wholly on reporting that "the Dallas Express said ..." — instead of confirming the report, these stories are really reporting that "a questionable Dallas media outlet published something." 173.175.200.238 (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The Dallas Morning News has now confirmed much of the story by talking to a family member. "Her son told The Dallas Morning News she is living at Tradition Senior Living in Fort Worth, but she is not in a memory care facility." https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2024/12/22/republican-rep-kay-granger-texas-missed-votes-dementia/ Wiffer (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

this is much more reliable, and not the same story the pink slime site was peddling 173.175.200.238 (talk) 19:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's behind a hard paywall. Wiffer (talk) 19:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

here is an archived version 173.175.200.238 (talk) 20:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The Dallas Morning News source is a good one that quotes her son as saying that she has been having some dementia issues late in the year. It should be mentioned in a sentence but there is no reason to make a big deal out of this because she has retired and her congressional career ended two days ago when the 118th Congress adjourned. Cullen328 (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Ok, your tact seems fine, but you might consider including the archive today link as the original DALLAS MORNING NEWS ljnk is indeed behind a hard pay wall as another user notes. I do, however, ask that ALL sources remain in, including the less reliable ones. But, perhaps the language of MSN "confirms" is inaccurate. Probably it should read "supported" or such. But all sources should remain as to give full context. Ill try to re-word my edit request to reflect the inaccurate of even MSN. Unless you can beat me to it. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

"she has retired and her congressional career ended two days ago" – the infobox describes her as the incumbent. Surely she is not due to leave office until her sucessor is sworn in? Harfarhs (talk) 23:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I've just restored the fact about Granger living in a senior center, with the Dallas Morning News as the source. I also moved her retirement to the end of the section about being a US Rep. YoPienso (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough, but i found reliable sources.

See here

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Kay_Granger#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_22_December_2024 107.123.37.79 (talk) 21:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm inserting "who has" into the lead: American politician... who has served as the U.S. representative... She's technically still "serving," i.e., is still in office. See the House site. YoPienso (talk) 00:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Some additional coverage from the New York Times here: House Member in Assisted Living Draws Fresh Scrutiny to an Aging Congress. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

See eg http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kay_Granger&diff=prev&oldid=1264954390#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_23_December_2024 where I added this to yesterday's semi-protected edit request below. Why don't you add this, as you are a registered editor? Thank you!107.115.165.20 (talk) 09:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I tried to use the clunky (supposedly helpful and useful) template to cite instead of my dear old She is a member of the United Methodist Church.

In December 2024, Granger was reported to be living in an assisted living facility for dementia patients in Texas after reports of extensive absences from Congress prompted an investigation by local news media, according to WCBM. This was also reported by NEWSWEEK, THE GUARDIAN, and MSN

However, her son told The Dallas Morning News, more recently, that she is living at Tradition Senior Living in Fort Worth, but insisted that she is not in a memory care facility, a news item that was picked up by POLITICO.

I'm updating my request with new information from a more trusted source, and ask that ALL sources remain so as to be unbiased and balanced

107.123.37.79 (talk) 18:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: Children/grandchildren and church reinstated. Remainder under discussion above. LizardJr8 (talk) 19:01, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I will add, however, that MSN has been cited by all sides as not biased here, and I fixed my formatting error regarding the GUARDIAN citation. My proposed edit above includes the original personal family and church content as well as the disputed material, but with 4 sources, at least 1 of which all sides accept. 172.56.72.166 (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

i for one absolutely oppose the MSN citation — if you click the link you'll see that the story has been removed.

also, are you and 107.123.37.79 the same user? 173.175.200.238 (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

1) this link is NOT a removed story

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/what-happened-to-kay-granger-missing-gop-rep-found-in-dementia-care-home/ar-AA1wirhE

2) I'm not sure of my ip address, but 2 things:

A) You can see it after I reply. It will auto-populate.

B) if you refer to the mental illness comments, that was not my edit, and also I'm a Conservative Republican who would have 2 reasons to not make a comment: it's morally wrong, it's going against a fellow Republican. But even if it were President Biden's story, it would be inappropriate to label a person as mentally ill, short of a formal diagnosis. I hope this helps. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh wait, yes the comments above are mine. I was logged in on my welfare phone (different IP ADDRESS), not this paid one. I had to change ip addresses as my welfare phone ip address was blocked, but yes, the comments defending MSN as not being biased are my comments in talk. The vandalism with mental ill comments were NOT mine. Sorry for the confusion. On an unrelated note, you know things are bad economic times when us Conservatives line up for a welfare phone! 😉 To clarify-- my welfare phone was apparently allowed to edit talk, but not the article. That's why I switched ip address. 🙏🙂Hope that helps. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I fixed the link. It was good, but my trailing forward slash made it a bad link. It's working now, and i fixed other issues and should be good to go as a final edit. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey, Lizard, another user, also unregistered i think, found a newer update and apparently more reliable from DMN, and i according updated my edit request. It might need a grammar tweak to reflect that earlier news reports were incomplete or such, but plz see above and run this up the totem pole, and get the registered user Chiefs to review it. Thx. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 20:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

for whatever reason that MSN link didn't work for me in the source list! but it's not an MSN story. it's a story by "Times Now News" published on msn.com, and the original story has all the same issues as the other sources.

regardless, the Dallas Morning News source above is reliable and not quite the same thing as what the Dallas Express reported. 173.175.200.238 (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

I updated my semi protect edit request to incorporate your new find here. Plz see above. 107.123.37.79 (talk) 20:18, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

References

I tried to use the clunky (supposedly helpful and useful) template to cite instead of my dear old < ref > thingies, and can't fix it. I can hardly even edit any more with all the "improvements." (Yes, I know the citation template is old. Somehow I never got the hang of it. I mean editing this page.) YoPienso (talk) 15:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC) aka Grumpy Granny

Don't worry: I found 4 reliable sources, 2 American and 2 foreign, 1 of the which includes The New York Times: see above. And the semi-protected status expires in a few hours. I don't feel this updated development should be lede, as another user (I feel legislative record is more important than medical and health issues), but do agree it's important. Im open to other feedback, but my proposed edit additions are above.107.115.165.20 (talk) 16:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

edit request

please roll back to this edit by Lenny Marks so there can be discussion about whether these sources are reliable for updating a BLP 173.175.200.238 (talk) 18:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

 Already done LizardJr8 (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

further editing request

right now the senior living thing is in both the retirement section and personal life section, and really only needs to be in one. additionally, i believe calling it "assisted-living" is inaccurate — that's the language of the unreliable Dallas Express (which i think is where Politico got that wording). her son told the Dallas Morning News it was independent living.

so, please remove this line from Personal Life: In December 2024, The Dallas Morning News reported that Granger's son said that she had been living in an assisted living facility and had "dementia issues."[65]

and the line in Retirement can be updated to say: In December 2024, The Dallas Morning News reported that Granger's son said she had been living in an independent senior living facility and had "dementia issues."[65] 173.175.200.238 (talk) 21:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Seems like you did the edit after the edit protection was dropped! ObserveOwl 🎄 (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Correct. I hope that i struck an acceptable compromise: one editor, also unregistered, wanted this new backlash stuff in lede, and others didn't want it AT ALL, so i stuck it in, but in 1 place only (after complaints of it being in personal section too, so someone removed it). Thus, it's in Retirement section and segues into debate add on, but that's it. I had to use 4 sources to be clear it was real news. Not "over citation," as YoPienso suggests, but I'm open to community discussion here. I hope that helps.107.115.165.20 (talk) 22:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Wait a second: that edit was by another unregistered user. Not sure, but it looks like it's a good edit as it seems to clean up grammar issues. I was the editor who added the new "sparked public debate" section below and after retirement. That's my only main contribution here. I hope that clears things up. I'm not sure about the other tweaks, but nothing stands out at me as worrisome.107.115.165.20 (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

new section

You forgot to sign your name, but I'll try to do it for you. See below for a copy/paste from the edit history of your edit here:

With regard to your suggestions that all the retirement stuff be consolidated into one section (either personal or retirement section) sounds good to me (and that's what I did myself), but I have no say in this as I'm also unregistered, and myself asked for the page to be semi-protected. However, even if the health issues and retirement home issues are put into 2 sections, it's still an OK article as it gives proper updates and is OK as an Encyclopedia entry. But, yeah, making it chronological and using consolidation would be optimal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.123.37.79 (talk) 21:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Reliability of unreliable sources now confirmed as major media confirms dementia care

People seem to hate the NY Post.

This incident shows that the New York Post and Newsweek are reliable, at least in the Kay Granger story. Now CBS News, Dallas Morning News and others are reporting the same thing.

Wikipedia should NOT be the mouthpiece of a few selected news sources. Be careful not to include gossip but also don't cede editorial decisions to a few of the big name media. ErrorCorrection1 (talk) 22:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

they weren't completely accurate in this case — Newsweek and the Post didn't actually do any reporting; they only repeated the Dallas Express. and the Dallas Express was in fact wrong on several major points. it said Rep. Granger had been missing for months (she hadn't), that she was in memory care (she isn't) and that she was found wandering in her neighborhood (this was based on pure gossip and has not been corroborated). 173.175.200.238 (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2024

2nd update: I close out and withdraw this request for the following reason:

The semi-protected status expired, and after limited but thoroughly deep concensus in talk, I made the compromise edit in question http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Kay_Granger&diff=prev&oldid=1265060467

I withdraw and close out my prior edit request, as a reliable news source (Dallas Morning News) was found to address Granger's absence. However, the broader context and public backlash and public debate was not addressed; therefore, I respectfully request the following edit be added:

As reported by both American and foreign news media -- including The New York Times -- this incident has sparked a public backlash and renewed scrutiny of elderly politicians of both political parties being allowed to serve in spite of advanced age and medical issues.

107.123.37.36 (talk) 12:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing me here. I could insert this, but why don't you? You can do it right now! Better yet, create an account; that will give you some credibility and a Wikipedian will drop by your talk page to welcome you and leave advice and links to helpful pages.

You would want to use only the NYT source; see WP:OVERCITE. YoPienso (talk) 22:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Censorship?

Why is information regarding Representative Granger’s months-long absence from Congress, and the discovery she has been residing in an assisted-living facility with dementia, been buried at the end of the article? This seems like subject matter appropriate for the lede section. Most biographical articles I’ve read on Wikipedia include current events and scandals in the introductory paragraphs. It strikes me as odd and even suspicious that this damning information is tacked on at the end of the article almost as if an afterthought. This woman has been collecting a federal salary without the ability to perform her Constitutional duties for several months. At the very least she is cheating her district out of representation, if not also cheating the entire American public out of taxpayer dollars (well, to be fair, if she indeed is suffering from dementia, she likely does not deserve the blame herself, but someone surely does). Someone please edit this article to reflect the supposed objectivity Wikipedia purports to possess. By that I mean, add details of her current scandal in the lede section. Thank you. 66.91.36.8 (talk) 01:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

This is because of a founding principle that Wikipedia uses only verifiable information found in reputable sources. I agree 100% with the principle. Unfortunately, the political bias of the contributors to Wikipedia who are powerful enough to have their way is leftist, so they've proscribed certain news outlets. Jimbo's original idea was to proscribe quacks. In real life, though, many MSM avoid certain facts, so until they report those facts, we can't use them here.

The original "Pillar #2" (See my user page and here.) says, "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons." YoPienso (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure it needs to be lede (as i feel legislative record is more important than health or age issues), but do feel it is newsworthy. See my latest proposal for edit.107.115.165.20 (talk) 16:27, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Please link to the diff of your latest proposal; I have no idea where or what it may be.

This page listing reliable sources may be helpful to you. Be sure to read the comments in the "Summary" column, which limit and explain the ratings. I pretty much agree with the assigned statuses, though I would upgrade Fox News (online, not their heavily biased radio and TV shows and commentary) to yellow, and downgrade ''The Independent'' to yellow; notice in the story about Granger that you refer to in ''The Independent'' mainly quotes the ''Dallas Express.'' Happy Holidays! YoPienso (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

You may be interested in this article, and particularly in this one. YoPienso (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Here is the diff in question, which seems updated, complete, and well-sourced without going too far (without making this a "lede" intro or a large section)

http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kay_Granger&diff=prev&oldid=1265006380

107.115.165.20 (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)