Talk:Elaine Brown

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

As a young woman and activist, she was known for her explosive temper, and as being "crazy and dangerous."[1]

This has NPOV problems because of the source being a blantantly conservative news source, the lack of balance of present or past alternative accounts of her attitude or temperament, and the wording itself, since hateful is a subjective term and never appears in the article itself. Colby 07:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


Someone put a picture of this Mulatto up.

--Chueyjoo 12:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


The first paragraph, apropos of nothing, declares, She is one crazy woman. This article is messy and needs work. And while I've only seen photos of her from the 70's and earlier, I think that this picture may not be of the same Elaine Brown.

Wow - Talk about biased writing: Horowitz is described as a "radical right-wing writer" but Elaine Browne is simply a "prison activist." Gee, she sounds nice. LOL. Is there no editorial oversight on wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.25.139 (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Questions? Ask them through Wikinews

Hello,

I'm Nick Moreau, an accredited reporter for Wikinews. I'm co-ordinating our 2008 US Presidential election interviews. We will be interviewing as many candidates as possible, from the Democrats, Republicans, and other parties/independents.

I'll be sending out requests for interviews to the major candidates very soon, but I want your input, as people interested in American politics: what should I ask them?

Please go to any of these three pages, and add a question.

Questions? Don't ask them here, I'll never see them. Either ask them on the talk page of any of these three pages, or e-mail me.

Thanks, Nick

[edit] Disambiguation

I am wondering if it would be a good idea to create a disambiguation page, since there is a woman named Elaine Brown in New Hampshire who is the wife of Edward Lewis Brown. The couple have been convicted of tax evasion and refuse to surrender to police. Many people have been paying attention to this story in New Hampshire, and there is already a page for Edward Lewis Brown. What do we think? Smashrgrl 14:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Smashrgrl

[edit] Quoting Sources Known To Be Heavily Biased Or Espousing Agendas

I have said it before, and I will say it again...

The comment by David Horowitz accusing her of orchestrated, political assignation in order to cover up her embezzlement of large sums of money is at BEST - dubious. This man has a history (since the late 1980s that is) of spouting fanatical right-wing opinions (as well as crypto-rascist ideologies) as if they were truths; then compelling the whole thing forward with a zealot's drive for arch-conservatism. Elaie Brown, may or may not be a decent person, that is ironically not the point of contention. Someone may be the worst human being on the planet, but if they have done nothing discernabley wrong -we are still just operating on gut feelings. Gut feelings should not be used to a country's foreign policies, nor should it be used to for this magnificent social project of recording our shared knowledge for the purposes of furthering the breadth, access, and quality of our sharing. A perpetual motion machine of experience.

That is why this entry so alarms me. I think it that this is a wonderful example of the things that we need to be aware of here on wikipedia. The statement is within the article; the statement is correctly attributed to a third party. For all intents and purposes this should validate the contents of that statement, yet it doesn't. If a news source gets the facts wrong, and then we quote the facts, does that then make us correct?

Sometimes even the best quotes, taken from the most reputable sources may in the end be nothing more than heavily POV lies. This is not facetious or a call to the POVs of the Left wing either. This is a sincere inquiry, lost amid a storm of comments, hidden in a corner. I sincerely pose this complex question that has been discussed for as long as there has been the question of what knowledge is, but am open to thoughts, and am actively soliciting them.

How do we fix the problem of legitimate quotes and references that are intrinsically illegitimate? Caspere 13:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)