Talk:Mazi Melesa Pilip

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for creating this article! Hopefully you will write more articles! Have a good day!

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Nonsensical revert

An editor using tools has made this nonsensical "antivandal" revert. It makes zero sense. Obviously not vandalism. It will therefore be reverted - absent a proper explanation. https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Mazi_Melesa_Pilip&diff=prev&oldid=1190659771 2603:7000:2101:AA00:4CBD:1DE:AA9E:9313 (talk) 04:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

External links

I am adding precisely the sort of external links called for by wp:el. If anyone would like to discuss - rather than edit war - this would be the place to do it. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:B473:66A7:77CD:34F0 (talk) 07:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• WP:LINKSTOAVOID - "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to social networking sites (such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram and TikTok), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Facebook Groups), Usenet newsgroups or email lists."

• WP:SOCIALS - "Facebook, Myspace, Instagram as an external link: Generally no. Regular websites are strongly preferred, but exceptions are made for official links when the subject of the article has no other Web presence"

Pilip's legislative and campaign websites obviously supersede any need for social media links. But hey, what good are rules if they can't be selectively ignored when it's convenient? --Woko Sapien (talk) 22:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Updated page to be in compliance with Wikipedia's rules. Woko Sapien (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

• Where in the rules do you believe that they supersede the right to have the links you are deleting? Given that the linked content does not necessarily primarily cover the area for which the subject of the article is notable. Certainly the legislative page itself didn't. You raise a fair point to consider about adding the campaign website. That may tip the balance. It's a close call. But I'm not clear on that. Open to discussion.2603:7000:2101:AA00:996D:F989:D942:3FFD (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

  Woko Sapien's interpretation of the guidelines (which they quoted) is correct. The only external links included in the article should be the Nassau County government site and Pilip's campaign website. Jfire (talk) 15:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

  This isn't the first time I've had to explain this basic concept to an IP editor. Woko Sapien (talk) 16:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

  While this is of course different than WS's first edits on the subject, as to which I've had to explain my differing views, given his addition and Jfire's input I'm fine with that change. BTW - someone has been adding untruths from time to time to the article, not supported by any RS refs - indeed, any refs at all. Since WS is keeping an eye on the article, perhaps WS can also revert those in the future as well. Would be helpful. Thanks. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:9D12:CDBF:BC4A:D297 (talk) 16:46, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Israel and antisemitism

There are two different concepts here, and thus two different sections are appropriate. Many people are of the view that though antisemites may be anti-Israel, not all who are anti-Israel are anti-semites. There is much written on the subject. For example here. https://m.georgetown.edu/welcome/student_news/detail?feed=student_news_1&id=085d42bf-813c-5df0-b1d2-0034dadad3f0&_kgoui_bookmark=e3637e94-03e0-5062-8b5b-f2e05174defa 2603:7000:2101:AA00:6452:6250:50CE:E0D7 (talk) 07:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Deletion

No proper reason for deleting this. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:BD26:ECD2:515B:4592 (talk) 08:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Israel Hayom is a partisan source and isn't appropriate for this. In future, please notify me if discussing my edits. Dcpoliticaljunkie (talk) 17:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Just watch this page and you will see edits to it. Other than your subjective view, where is the RSN evidence that it is not an RS as you assert?

Correction.

The article says “Democrats have noted ..”. When it is one individual. Albeit a spokesperson for a Democratic Campaign Committee. Someone - even when this was fixed - has chosen to inflate the individual. It should be fixed again. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:BDAB:52FF:A29D:FE69 (talk) 08:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Disagree, other democratic groups have mentioned this as well. A spokesperson speaks on behalf of a group, in this case the Democrats. This has already been fixed. Nygoppolitico (talk) 15:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Misleading abortion discussion and inlining

Someone - even when it is fixed (which it is not now) misleadingly inlines. She is against abortion for herself the refs say. But not for others. But someone consistently blatantly misleads readers in this. Deleted what she clearly says directly in this point. And also inlines to “anti abortion movement” - no doubt all this is unintentional and good faith but it is still quite misleading and should be fixed. (Of course I think this is all done in good faith). 2603:7000:2101:AA00:BDAB:52FF:A29D:FE69 (talk) 08:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Please share where she says she is against abortion for others. A previous edit said she was pro-life as that is what the sources say, but was removed as Wikipedia guidelines do not use "pro-life." Only seeing that she does not plan on voting for a national abortion ban from the sources, not that she is for abortion for others. Nygoppolitico (talk) 15:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Not in ref

“ not a paratrooper as she has claimed” - not in the ref - was restored. We should delete it again. As uncited blp. Mazi Melesa Pilip 2603:7000:2101:AA00:BDAB:52FF:A29D:FE69 (talk) 08:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

It is cited in the reference.

Pilip clarified in a Dec. 18 interview with Jewish Insider that she served as a gunsmith with the paratrooper unit, noting, "I was in charge of all the weapons." Her Instagram bio still described her as a "former IDF Paratrooper."

There are other sources that have mentioned this correction as well and previous coverage of her including her local level campaigns have her calling herself a paratrooper. Not sure why you're trying to delete a well documented fact. Nygoppolitico (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Deletion for no valid reason

An editor appears to have disliked text. So he deleted it. Reason in edit summary? “Shortening.” Actually, he deleted the entire text in question. No proper reason.

The text read as follows. Someone should restore it. I’m sure it was inadvertent and in good faith.

Lawrence C. Levy, the executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies at Hofstra University, said that Pilip "is Suozzi’s worst nightmare" because many voters will vote for the candidate they think will be more supportive of Israel, and Pilip's service in the IDF will play a large role in voters’ thinking. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:BDAB:52FF:A29D:FE69 (talk) 08:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

References

Dual citizenship

MAZI IS A FUSL CITIZENSHIP. ISRAEL & US or Ethiopia? 100.33.83.153 (talk) 23:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Not seeing in the source where she is a dual citizen or a "fusl" citizen. BBQboffin^{grill me} 02:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Political Affiliation

It looks like this might be incorrect because she is currently a Republican running for the congressional seat vacated by George Santos. I'm guessing she was a Democrat until 2012 and has been a Republican since then, which is the opposite of what is stated here as her political affiliation under Personal Details. I was going to change it but wanted to leave a comment to stave off reversion. Eegorr (talk) 02:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Sources say her voter registration is a D. In the infobox it shows "Other political affiliations" as Republican Caucus from 2022 onwards. That seems to me to be the correct presentation, but it does present an editing challenge when actions (running on the R ballot line) and self-identification (still registered as D) don't match exactly. BBQboffin^{grill me} 08:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Republican?

Why does her political affiliation show as Democrat from 2012 onwards? 184.74.206.74 (talk) 07:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Why the push to delete?

I just came to this article for information. I see that it is marked for deletion. This seems strange to me. The NY-3 special election just occurred, and will be of considerable interest for some time. That includes interest in the candidates. This is especially the case since the regular NY-3 election will occur in November 2024 and positioning for it will begin very soon. Bill7436 (talk) 15:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

When she was originally announced, the page staying in place was contingent on her win in the Special election. Now that she has lost and has not announced she running again, there is not reason for us to not delete this as she is only a local legislator now. Politicsny (talk) 15:25, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, whatever Wikipedia wants to do. But the fact is that people will be researching that special election for some time (until the November elections), and she is a part of it. Bill7436 (talk) 17:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

A lot of people try to apply a very strict version of WP:POLITICIAN. Basically "if you're not an elected politician, you're not notable" which is not what the guideline says. Mooonswimmer 18:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)