Talk:Oxiris Barbot

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, 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.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 6 April 2020 by reviewer Sulfurboy (talk · contribs).

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 articles

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Sourcing/Bias

Nearly exclusive hard right-wing 'sources' and references. Clear intended bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1404:8499:ADCE:B009:B087:1085 (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to counter this sourced information with other information you are free to do so, provided you similarly source it.

Agree w/above editor. This is all RS sourced. Feel free to add other RS info if you like and can find it. --2604:2000:E010:1100:9AD:56F9:5EE0:1FF (talk) 09:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren’t WP:RS for the post part and per WP:BLP they need to be. I will be removing all non-RS as required by the BLP policy. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 14:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please show consensus that those are not RSs, per the RSN. The NY Daily News is not an RS? Otherwise, lacking consensus, it is disruptive to removed RSs and accompanying text, and they must be restored. Your deletions seem unusually heavy handed and inappropriate. Perhaps User:Blueboar can weigh in and give us an informed view. 2604:2000:E010:1100:4879:DAE5:B3E1:EEC5 (talk) 16:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to misunderstand how consensus works in this context, for use on a BLP there needs to be consensus of reliability and per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources there is not that for either of those sources. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also who is Blueboar and why are you tagging them? They don’t appear to have ever edited this page or to have any relationship with any edits made by you. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again - please show consensus that those are not Rss, per the RSN. You've again failed to. But you deleted a lot of text supported by those refs. User:Blueboar is a veteran of RSN issues, so seems a good seasoned editor to give a third opinion here. 2604:2000:E010:1100:4879:DAE5:B3E1:EEC5 (talk) 17:49, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I linked you to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, the onus is on you to go look (why would you trust me anyways?). I assure you it won’t take more than ten seconds, they’re right next to each other. They’re also the same color, what color do you think that is? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 17:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating that a source is RS does not make it RS. Tucker Carlson has next to nothing to do with this article and does not belong here. A far-left editorial would be equally out of place. This is editorial convention, not personal bias. Nearly every article sourced comes from a clearly-biased website. Tag should be restored; this debate proves, if nothing else, that consensus does not exist. Furthermore, re-adding Tucker Carlson's irrelevant comments (temporally inconsistent with the paragraph in which they are present), despite the fact that they have been called into reasonable debate, demonstrates the clear bias of the author. One should at least make the effort to appear neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1404:8499:9CC5:AE2D:D26:7227 (talk) 21:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is not an authoritative guide to reliable sources. As the introduction says,

This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.

So you can't assume that a source is not WP:RS just because WP:RSP says it's not.

BTW, WP:RSP lists the New York Daily News as "generally reliable." --Nbauman (talk) 05:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:Reliable sources WP:BIASEDSOURCES:

Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject.

Therefore, Tucker Carlson could be a WP:RS for a viewpoint on Oxiris Barbot, even though he may be non-neutral or biased. For purposes of consensus, I believe that he is. --Nbauman (talk) 05:55, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The policy WP:NPOV requires that we represent "fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic."

Tucker Carlson is not the only WP:RS to present this view of Barbot. For example, the following article gives a similar criticism:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/nyregion/new-york-coronavirus-response-delays.html

How Delays and Unheeded Warnings Hindered New York’s Virus Fight

The federal response was chaotic. Even so, the state’s and city’s own initial efforts failed to keep pace with the outbreak, The Times found.

J. David Goodman

New York Times

April 9, 2020

I recommend a Google search of the New York Times for Barbot (use "Site:nytimes.com oxiris barbot"). If you want to find out her public health work besides the coronavirus epidemic (which this article could use), you should do a Pubmed search https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ for "oxiris barbot". --Nbauman (talk) 06:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]