Talk:Kamala Harris#Moving forward with NPOV issues

{{edit semi-protected|Kamala Harris|answered=yes}}

Remove being African American. She is not. Her mother is Indian and father Jamaican. 2406:2D40:73CD:2810:D97B:3A73:18C1:F7E9 (talk) 02:02, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{not done}}: Please see the FAQ for this article. Aoi (青い) (talk) 02:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Can someone edit this page someone… well you can see 2601:400:C000:25C0:284B:6122:4D13:392D (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:What do you object to, we cannot guess. Slatersteven (talk) 14:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::It's just the N-word over and over Okra33 (talk) 14:53, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:::We do not use the N word once. Slatersteven (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::::@Slatersteven we had a vile vandal that filled some articles with the n word yesterday. Some users have complained that it still comes up in previews. I don't know what the solution is as the edits were rev/del. Knitsey (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::So it has already been dealt with. Maybe people need to read the current article? Slatersteven (talk) 15:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::It's not that, it's the preview when you hover over the article. I can't tell if that is still the case as I'm on mobile. Knitsey (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::The preview doesn't show up on my end. Departure– (talk) 15:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Slatersteven, I thought I had seen this mentioned, Wikipedia:Help desk#How can I fix vandalism in a page preview (*not* the actual page) Knitsey (talk) 15:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::It doesn't show up on the web page link, but it does on the app. It's still there as of now Okra33 (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:What you saw was vandalism, plain and simple. Another editor reverted the change now, so the page no longer contains such unencyclopedic language, and oversight has removed the revision from public view as plain disruption. As this high-visibility page has been downgraded from extended-confirmed protection (meaning only accounts over one month old with 500 edits could change content on it), autoconfirmed accounts (those with over 10 edits and an account four days or older) have been vandalizing it more often, so it may need to be re-protected if disruption continues. Departure– (talk) 15:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::@Departure– The App Version still shows only one repeated insult as of 17:34 UTC+2 PenguinInDisguise (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::In this case the autoconfirmed account did the usual circumvention by doing 10 quick edits in their sandbox to gain autoconfirmed status, and then immediately proceeded to vandalize this article. I've always felt there should be some sort of heuristic to withhold autoconfirmed status when someone is clearly trying to game the system. Like for example, 10 edits in four days, either spread out over those four days, or actual content edits rather than 2-character additions and deletions repeated. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:38, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

:It is fixed as of 12:43 utc 2601:400:C000:25C0:284B:6122:4D13:392D (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:It is fixed as of 12:44 est 2601:400:C000:25C0:284B:6122:4D13:392D (talk) 16:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

In the last sentence of the second paragraph of the "Political Positions" section, one article is cited that calls Kamala Harris a populist. Yes, that's true that the article says that, but I think we are giving undue weight to a minority opinion. Kamala Harris is not widely regarded as a populist, and I don't think I ever remember her saying anything about "elites" or anything like that, which is essential to being a populist. On the pages for populism and in the United States, Harris isn't even mentioned once, while Sanders and Trump (opponents of her runs in 2020 and 2024) are referenced frequently. I think we should remove everything in that sentence after the comma.

In summary, referencing the article that calls her a populist is given undue weight. Terraviridian (talk) 01:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:Removing this information seems too extreme to me. A smaller step in your direction is to name the sources that call her politics "populist". The relevant guideline can be seen at WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. We can say that a trio of Politico writers including White House journalist Myah Ward, and a trio of WaPo journalists including White House reporter Yasmeen Abutaleb have called Harris's politics populist. Binksternet (talk) 02:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Kamala Harris is not black in the American sense of the word. She is of Jamaican origin and half. Her father is Jamaican while her mother is Indian. Calling her African American is a humongous slap in the face at least to me as someone who is half African American. It is also a bit of a misnomer to call her Asian American since we do not technically refer to Indians as being Asian American (they are from Asia but so are Middle Easterners and Russians and we don't call those people Asian Americans). This misnomer is extremely harmful to many groups both who feel improperly mentioned and rudely excluded, like biracial groups, Indian groups, Jamaican groups, and African-American groups. To be considered African-American, your lineage and family generally must have experienced both slavery and segregation on US soil (or what later became US soil), unless you descend from free blacks, which is rare. Likewise calling her Asian-American might undercut the experiences of Indian American who experience a type of racism and xenophobia similar to that of Middle Easterners, and which typical Asian-Americans do not. Furthermore, the biracial erasure is very clear and powerful and should be mentioned as primary, rather than propping her up incorrectly as an African-American. The text would be better suited to be written as "Harris is the first female vice-President, the first biracial vice President, the first vice-President of Indian heritage, and the first vice-President of black Jamaican heritage." This would respect all groups she belongs to and respect groups she does not belong to but is being lumped into for political reasons. Obviously, Mrs. Harris knows this herself but since the game is played so sneakily she does not ask for that information to be updated or altered. 38.27.115.10 (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:See FAQ. Slatersteven (talk) 12:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Previously, some editors opposed including a presidential debate mentioned in the lead primarily based on past precedents, such as prior presidential candidates Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney not having debates mentioned in their leads.

In case of Harris, we have WP:RS sources that mention that this presidential debate was a notable aspect of her career.

: "this was clearly Harris’ best debate performance of her career, without any clear missteps".

: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/11/harris-biden-debate-winner-takeaways-00178442

: Also, its sufficiently detailed in the article body, and therefore should be summarized briefly per WP:LEAD

: On September 10, 2024, ABC News hosted the presidential debate between Harris and Trump in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In the debate, Trump tried to portray Harris as a "radical liberal". Harris's sharpest criticisms of Trump came on abortion rights, where she said she would restore women's rights to what they were under Roe. Harris was declared the winner of the debate by several political analysts, including columnists from CNN, Politico, The New York Times, and USA Today. Some analysts noted that for Harris, this was the "best debate performance of her career," in which she forcefully highlighted her strengths and rattled former president Trump. After the debate, Harris got a prominent celebrity endorsement from Taylor Swift. However, the polls remained close and showed Harris had a hard time conveying that she could represent a "change".

Therefore, I think it should be included in the lead per WP:RS notable aspect argument.

:best debate performance of their career would imply notable performance.

:We need to follow the WP:RS sources

:For additional English meaning for Wiki editors whoose first language is not English. See Google Search "Best performance of the career" in English on Google.com

:Best performance of the career in English refers to the highest or most outstanding achievement or accomplishment someone has made throughout their professional life, often considered their peak or most memorable success.

:https://www.google.com/search?q=best+performance+of+the+career+meaning+in+english&oq=best+performance+of+the+career+meaning+in+english

Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 03:24, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:Why does this need to be in the lede? At the end of the day, it made no difference. Slatersteven (talk) 08:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::Because per WP:RS sources, the this was the best debate of her career, making it one of the most notable events of Harris's life and political career. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::The wp:lede is a summary of OUR article. How much space does this take up in the body? Slatersteven (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::: It is sufficiently detailed in the article body, and therefore should be summarized briefly per WP:LEAD

::::: On September 10, 2024, ABC News hosted the presidential debate between Harris and Trump in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In the debate, Trump tried to portray Harris as a "radical liberal". Harris's sharpest criticisms of Trump came on abortion rights, where she said she would restore women's rights to what they were under Roe. Harris was declared the winner of the debate by several political analysts, including columnists from CNN, Politico, The New York Times, and USA Today. Some analysts noted that for Harris, this was the "best debate performance of her career," in which she forcefully highlighted her strengths and rattled former president Trump. After the debate, Harris got a prominent celebrity endorsement from Taylor Swift. However, the polls remained close and showed Harris had a hard time conveying that she could represent a "change". Thanks. RogerYg (talk)

::::RogerYg (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::I am suggesting adding one line on debate in the last paragraph of the Lead that deals with her 2024 campaign. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 09:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::I disagree One paragraph is "substantial, and as such my objection stands. Slatersteven (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::I think there is some misunderstanding. I am not asking for one paragraph, only 1 line in the lead.

:::::::That paragraph is from article body. RogerYg (talk) 09:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Yes that is my point, one paragraph in the body is not "substantial". and with that, I am out of here with a firm NO. Slatersteven (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::In my humble view, there are often notable aspects in lead that may have only 1 paragraph in the body. Hence, our reasoning should be based on whether sufficient WP:RS sources mention the event as notable aspect to include it in the lead. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)