Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:06, 23 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kimberly Cheatle article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Illinois

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Excessively Curated Page

For such a prominent federal position this bio is excessively brief and uninformative about the person. Lets build this out? 2601:185:8280:2240:BF27:B72A:F9AF:2E36 (talk) 18:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Just added a small paragraph with reliable sources (RS) regarding the bipartisan calls for Cheatle to resign. It is written in a very neutral tone. Let's see how long it lasts.

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:6CF6:51A:9F1F:8524 (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roof expert

WP:NOTFORUM

Roof is a 4/12 pitch. Almost like walking on the ground. What a dumb comment she made. 71.201.205.217 (talk) 12:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ten stromy dach to płasko wysklepiona jażń. absttractio ad absurdum . palu.den. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.26.112.39 (talk) 17:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is to discuss the article, not the subject of the article. 174.61.187.77 (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article should include her statement saying that the secret service chose not to cover that roof because of it's slope. The article should also include the actual slope of the roof in question. 149.137.197.20 (talk) 22:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would be original research. Just because you look at a photo of that roof and conclude that the slope is insignificant, does not matter. You are not a certified expert in the topic, and original research should not be on Wikipedia anyways. We need official sources for that, and neither the CNN nor other reputable sources touched on the topic of the slope of the roof. Only Republican-leaning media reported about the alleged slope of the roof, but they are not considered reliable sources. Therefore, unless a reliable source mentions otherwise, the roof the shooter was on, is extremely sloped and would have been very dangerous to station agents on it. This comes from a certified source, and therefore this is fact, period. 2A02:2F07:DE10:E400:3872:33B:7421:5EFA (talk) 15:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an uninformed and biased reply. Stick to the facts and the experts data ! 2600:1700:8540:7590:B863:4E7C:7377:C188 (talk) 15:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reliable source has mentioned that the Secret Service were stationed on another building with a "much steeper incline". Per CNN article from yesterday 7/21:

"If the slope of the roof didn’t stop the shooter’s ability to open fire, why did it stop law enforcement from staging there? Secret Service snipers, including the ones who killed Crooks, were also staged on a rooftop with a much steeper incline without a problem."

So while the opinion of this section's "roof expert" does not matter, reliable sources do.

With that said, we could mention her initial response(s) in the section about the attempted assassination, but I'm personally just going to wait for reliable sources to comment on her hearing before adding anything about her initial responses. Another editor could add if they want now, though. Hella say hella (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of information.

Normally in a Wikipedia article about someone, there is a section saying whether they are married, if they have children, what religion (if any) they follow, and so on. This article seems to have no such information - the article appears to be very incomplete. There are all sorts of stories going around - it would be good if the article set out factual information about this person, doing so would reduce speculation and wild stories. 2A02:C7C:E183:AC00:AD9B:AB0F:E8F6:47B7 (talk) 06:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly has there been speculation about her children, marriage or religion? Trade (talk) 23:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fix citation [9]

Citation number 9 references "Security Magazine". It appears this was citing https://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/97889-women-in-security-2022-kimberly-cheatle-pepsico, but for some reason something broke it 174.61.187.77 (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tense change - please fix

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Currently reads: "From 2019 to 2022, Cheatle served as senior director of global security at PepsiCo, where she was responsible for directing and implementing security protocols for the company's facilities in North America. Her role involves developing risk management assessment and risk mitigation."

I think that should be "her role involved", past tense.2604:3D09:C77:4E00:291C:DD7E:431E:B719 (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moot

– The sentence in question has since been removed outright by another editor. Left guide (talk) 00:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calls to resign

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

She has faced calls to resign, be fired, or be taken into custody for questioning about complicity in murder 2603:9001:5D00:2608:9540:1657:BB53:310A (talk) 22:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The calls for her resignation are already in the article. "Taken into custody"? Do you have a reliable source for that? Joyous! Noise! 22:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the commments of this video:

https://www.youtube.com/live/t4Qi7pfBxzQ?si=RKOgMxr5fncVuHS4 2603:9001:5D00:2608:9540:1657:BB53:310A (talk) 23:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something like a news article would be a far better source Trade (talk) 23:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to see a reliable source saying she's facing calls to "be taken into custody for questioning about complicity in murder."

Every reliable source I've read is simply reporting that she's facing calls to resign. Hella say hella (talk) 00:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like something Marjorie Taylor Greene would say tbh. Trade (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating of "the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades"

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"she acknowledged it was 'the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades'" seems repeated on July 13, 2024 and on July 22, 2024, if this is not an error maybe on the 2nd date it could be rephrased to something like (not a native speaker so I'm sure it could be phrased better): "she reaffirmed/reiterated her earlier statement on July 13, 2024 that it was 'the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades'" to avoid the risk of misinterpretation of the timeline? 79.138.18.89 (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, after re-reading it I think it is actually the same event that is repeated twice, ie: it should probably be removed from the 1st paragraph relating to July 13th. 79.138.18.89 (talk) 22:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already done This was fixed here. Jamedeus (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal intent

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Many Americans believe criminal intent was there which means she should not only resign or be fired but also be arrested and brought in for questioning 2603:9001:5D00:2608:9540:1657:BB53:310A (talk) 23:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is already covered in Misinformation and conspiracy theories Trade (talk) 23:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, a few Americans are calling for that, but it has no place in her article (this page). Hella say hella (talk) 00:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presidential Rank Award

Article says she was awarded Presidential Rank Award in 2021.This is an award for members of the Senior Executive Service. At that time she was with Pepsi, not in the Senior Executive Service. The timeline doesn't make sense. 173.93.50.80 (talk) 11:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 :This is already covered in [[Attempted assassination of Donald Trump#Misinformation and conspiracy theories|Misinformation and conspiracy theories]] [[User:Trade|Trade]] ([[User talk:Trade|talk]]) 23:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
 :Correct, a few Americans are calling for that, but it has no place in her article (this page). [[User:Hella say hella|Hella say hella]] ([[User talk:Hella say hella|talk]]) 00:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
+== Presidential Rank Award ==
+Article says she was awarded Presidential Rank Award in 2021.This is an award for members of the Senior Executive Service.  At that time she was with Pepsi, not in the Senior Executive Service.  The timeline doesn't make sense. [[Special:Contributions/173.93.50.80|173.93.50.80]] ([[User talk:173.93.50.80|talk]]) 11:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)