Talk:Alice Walton

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alice Walton 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

Archives: 1, 2: 12 months

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

United States Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

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

Women in Business High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business 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.Women in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is the subject of a request emailed to the Volunteer Response Team (VRT).

Issues identified are: A November 2007 article attributes a quote to Walton following her arrest for drunk driving. This is a mistake in that article; the phrase originates from a September 2006 article in the New York Enquirer which imagines this is what she said to the officer (and clearly explains it as such). Copies of both articles have been provided to OTRS and I am satisfied this is an inaccuracy - please do not restore it --Errant ^(chat!) 20:19, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The VRTS ticket number is 2012082010007945.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Kt2011 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Walton family office. Declaration

Recent vandalism

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi editors, I noticed that a pair of edits were recently made that are pretty clear vandalism, adding a random name and phone number.

GRuban, I hate to bother you again so soon, but would you be willing to revert this change? As always, I won't make direct changes due to my conflict of interest. Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 14:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have reverted it. Thanks! (Reverting clear vandalism is allowed by anyone per WP:COIADVICE, but I appreciate that you also wanted to do everything unambiguously by the book, so pinging someone about this was a good choice as well.) DanCherek (talk) 16:38, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DanCherek: Thank you very much! Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 20:11, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hello editors, I noticed some recent edits by an IP editor that seem to be pretty clear cases of vandalism, changing dates and the abbreviation for the United States. @DanCherek and GRuban: would either of you be willing to review and revert these changes? I'd appreciate it. Due to my COI I'll hold off on fixing this myself. Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 16:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kt2011:

Done, thanks for pointing this out! DanCherek (talk) 16:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@DanCherek: Thanks for the help! Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 18:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request: Personal Life section (new edit)

Hi! The "Personal life" section was edited again to include an incident that has been discussed several times on this talk page in 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021 as well as Biographies of living persons in 2017. The 2011 incident never resulted in charges and was, in fact, expunged from the record. I still believe this issue may fall under WP:BLP guidelines, particularly:

"Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives."

Also, User:GRuban wrote here previously, "the due process resulted in (a) no charges, and even (b) expungement. Even without the expungement I don't think random traffic stops deserve mention in an encyclopedia article".

I will not directly edit this page because I have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; I work with the Walton family office, as I disclosed on my user page and declared on this talk page. Thanks, Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 19:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These previous discussions are all you agreeing with ~~GRubin~~ GRuban, which does not amount to a consensus to keep this material out of the article. Gamaliel (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Er:

I'm GRuban, actually; no i;
If you read deeper into the previously linked discussions, you'll see we originally disagreed on multiple issues, which Kt also wanted removed, and I insisted be left in;
and consensus does seem to be evidenced by the fact that the decision has been made this way for the past seven years and five different occasions,
they were not just Kt and myself discussing, but multiple other people who wanted to put the content in, and eventually gave in, which is one of the more common ways consensus is made around here.

Consensus can, of course, change, so it's not tremendously useful to argue whether or not there was one, the key point is whether or not there is one now. But I will ask you to address the reasoning behind the decision, consensus or not, which was:

This article is a WP:BLP, which "must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy".
The issue in question was a DWI traffic stop, in general a misdemeanor. In general we do not mention misdemeanors on BLPs; they're just not big enough of a deal, considering the previous point.
The issue in question was expunged from Walton's record. We aren't here to overrule that legal decision.

Also, I have to say, the specific way you wrote the sentences is basically a BLP violation - you're implying that Walton used her influence to get the arresting officer suspended, which is a really big deal, and I'm surprised you are writing it that way given your experience. We don't write that sort of damning allegation against a living person unless we have very strong proof from highly reliable sources. But that's not one of the three points I'm asking you to address, as I was and intend to be removing previous versions of the story that didn't make that implication. Anyway, please do respond to the points. --GRuban (talk) 19:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for spelling your user name wrong. I'm often the victim of that myself. While I don't believe the edit was a BLP violation, I'm certainly open to rewording my edit in a manner that is mutually satisfactory. In regards to your points, a legal expungement does not mean the incident never happened for our purposes and IMO doesn't have any bearing on inclusion, what's far more significant is if reliable sources report on it. I admit I don't know what the general threshold is for inclusion of alleged offences, but I'm not aware of any rule or precedent that prohibits inclusion of misdemeanors. If there is please make me aware of it. Gamaliel (talk) 19:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We're getting somewhere. There isn't a specific rule about inclusion of traffic stops that I know, but there is the general "write BLPs conservatively and with regard to subject privacy" bit, which is policy. I would argue that means not to include minor controversies, of which this is one. We also generally don't accuse people of crime unless there is a conviction. This incident was not only not a conviction, it was actually expunged from her record, which is the opposite of a conviction. --GRuban (talk) 20:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:GRuban for reviewing this request, and User:Gamaliel for your feedback. I do believe that because the arrest was expunged from the record, and because the incident never resulted in any charges, it does not belong in an encyclopedia article. If we think it is best to revisit this at WP:BLP/N, I'm happy to bring it up there. Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 22:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have posted a new message at BLP/N. Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 22:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recently posted to BLP/N in an effort to come to a consensus on this issue. However, I did not receive any constructive replies about the content. Gamaliel, Do you have any other suggestions for how we can come to consensus on this? Thanks very much! Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 21:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kt2011, looks like you wanted to ping Gamaliel just above there (or possibly both of us), and instead only pinged me. You want

{{u|Gamaliel}} or {{ping|GRuban|Gamaliel}} not {{u|GRuban|Gamaliel}}

But the fact you did ping me may be to the good, since I'm surprised to see that this text wasn't removed. From your 4 June message, I got the impression that it was removed. See, Gamaliel, as an administrator, should know that it is, in fact, his responsibility to gain consensus for adding this information. It is not our responsibility to gain consensus for removing it. That's true for all articles, but especially for contested information in WP:BLPs. Now, I'd be happy if he were to start an RFC, and discuss it, that's far preferable to just reverting. But he hasn't. He just restored the contested information, without responding to our objections. So I'm going to put this in writing. User:Gamaliel, either:

leave the information out, or
establish consensus to have it, whether by convincing us here, or by convincing many other editors in an RfC, or
be blocked.

Really. I am sorry to write in this tone, and I wouldn't be, if you weren't an experienced editor, and an administrator, as you can see, I didn't in the previous incidents. But you are an experienced editor an administrator. You should know this. --GRuban (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cry about it 2601:805:701:5BC0:8775:88E1:879C:3FDC (talk) 01:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content added to Personal life section

Hi! Once more, the "Personal life" section was edited to include an incident that has been discussed several times on this talk page as recently as this year, just a few months ago plus in 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021 as well as Biographies of living persons in 2017.

The 2011 incident (which this edit incorrectly says occurred in 2021) never resulted in charges and was, in fact, expunged from the record.

To review, this issue falls under WP:BLP guidelines, particularly:

"Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives."

User:GRuban given both this topic as well as the recent and frequent string of vandalism, I'm curious if you think it would be appropriate to add some page protection to this article?

I will not directly edit this page because I have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; I work with the Walton family office, as I disclosed on my user page and declared on this talk page. Thanks, ~~~~ Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 22:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit removed. Protection: yes, I think some level is worth asking for. The last year has seen about 50 edits, of which just under half have been reverted, that seems to indicate that. Not sure whether pending changes or semi-protection seems better, maybe another page reader knows? --GRuban (talk) 01:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boo hoo. Cry more. 2601:805:701:5BC0:D31E:50F6:5884:5AE0 (talk) 01:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two years semi-protection thanks to the munificent User: Risker. Long may they conquer Brazil from North Africa.--GRuban (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GRuban and Risker! Kt2011 (Talk · COI:Walton family) 17:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Friendship

Hello dear Madame good night I am in Bangladeshi citizen I am interested in your friend or life partner can you agree please..+8801858211918 103.137.108.161 (talk) 16:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]