Talk:Mark Robinson (American politician)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mark Robinson (American politician) 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article: You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days) 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.

A fact from Mark Robinson (American politician) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 November 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that when he is sworn in next year, Mark Robinson will become the first Black lieutenant governor of North Carolina? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mark Robinson (American politician).

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Mark Robinson (American politician). Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Mark Robinson (American politician) at the Reference desk.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government 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 This article is supported by the politics and government work group. United States: North Carolina / 50,000 Challenge Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Mid-importance). This article was created or improved during this WikiProject's 50,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help! African diaspora Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Firearms Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Discrimination Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

The Political views and remarks section has too many extraneous quotes by people who are not Mark Robinson. Per WP:UNDUE, not every viewpoint Robinson has needs to be extensively contextualized or criticized by a political opponent. Cf. Rishi Sunak § Political positions for an example that reads much better. —  AjaxSmack  17:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took a pass at the first two subsections. More to be done. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I wasn't volunteering someone else, but just didn't want to step into anything too fast. —  AjaxSmack  18:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Let's face it, if Robinson's career had happened 40 years ago this wouldn't be an issue. This is why I struggle to keep up with articles involving current controversial political figures, and am resigned to leaving them in such poor state. A bunch of WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS issues. Every thing they say gets reported on and then within 48 hours is added to the laundry list of "can you believe they said this" in their respective article. Granted, the lieutenant governor can't do much but deliver speeches, but we should really be thinking along the lines of "Would the George Wallace article be better served by a Controversial Statements section?" And in the section, should it be noted that these statements "have drawn criticism" (without discussing the merits of Robinson's statements in particular, what political statement doesn't "draw criticism" these days)? At least when I added the info on the FACTS Task Force it was about an actual, official action he had taken, controversial as it was, and not just "he said something and some people don't like what he said". Granted, historical hindsight can offer immense clarity. -Indy beetle (talk) 09:02, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Education for Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson was completed at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. His degree is a B.A. in History. He graduated December 9th, 2022.

This link shares that information and has also been noted in several speeches: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/voter-guide/article285045767.html Jwwaugh (talk) 02:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: The provided source does not confirm the graduation date and only addresses this on one line:

Education: UNC-Greensboro, Bachelor of Arts, History.

Since this is a candidate Q&A its unclear if this has been fact checked by the paper or is just the candidate's own answer printed verbatim. I wasn't able to find another source confirming that he has graduated, but found a couple saying he dropped out 3 classes short of graduation. Its possible he gave this response because he is very close to a degree, as many other politicians have.

If you find other secondary sources confirming that he has graduated please reopen the request. Thanks. Jamedeus (talk) 03:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following link from the UNCG Graduation on December 9, 2022. You will see Mark Keith Robinson under graduates.

https://commencement.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/2022-Fall-Commencement-Program.pdf 2600:1004:B217:1A80:1C3A:88EB:BE43:D761 (talk) 15:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can also view this. This is the State of the State Response given by Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson where he mentions finishing his degree:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xkWHugf46o8 2600:1004:B217:1A80:1C3A:88EB:BE43:D761 (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following link from the UNCG Graduation on December 9, 2022. You will see Mark Keith Robinson under graduates.

https://commencement.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/2022-Fall-Commencement-Program.pdf

You can also view this. This is the State of the State Response given by Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson where he mentions finishing his degree:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xkWHugf46o82600 Jwwaugh (talk) 01:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks clearly like a smear attempt trying to harm patriotic-conservative voices. 2003:DA:C729:AA00:5148:1011:A09D:92E6 (talk) 00:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a factual biography. What does that say about him that you think it's a smear attempt? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The third paragraph in the introduction section does sound very biased and could be reworded to sound more neutral and perhaps given its own section further down. Bjoh249 (talk) 02:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is in a single sentence. We get it Wiki you don't like this guy, but you should at least attempt to write correctly. Or is it just a code that noone should take this seriously? 222.108.156.194 (talk) 02:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are approaching the subject neutrally, but I do agree that "baselessly" and "with no evidence" in the same sentence is redundant and have cut the latter part. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia - you labeled Mark Robinson as an antisemite by taking a speech he made against dictators out of context. Zero creds, Wiki! 170.203.43.28 (talk) 17:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The whole "Antisemitic remarks" section makes no mention of any speech about dictators. Zero creds, IP! -Indy beetle (talk) 00:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What statements were you referring to when you said he has been known to make antisemitic statements. I’m curious. The question of what that means exactly crossed my mind when I read it. Again, I’m just asking for examples. RoadSanta (talk) 14:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://theurbannews.com/government/2023/robinson-im-not-no-african-american/ I’m sorry but saying that you identify as just American and not African American isn’t anti black like I’m of Irish decent but I identify as just American not Irish American that doesn’t make me anti Irish 2600:8801:1187:7F00:5843:1048:41E6:90E6 (talk) 21:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't read the whole article, did you? It actually says other things than the headline, and details other attacks against blacks and women. Skyerise (talk) 22:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen this before editing, but I did just revert the addition of "anti-Black" to the lead. If there are strong sources describing Robinson's statements as anti-Black (or something synonymous), I would be happy to review them. The sources provided, including theurbannews, were not so strong. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to agree that his views on racial issues in the American context are, well, quixotic at best, but I think qualifying them as "anti-black", especially in the lead, is not the proper approach, especially with such niche sourcing. -Indy beetle (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree and have restored the material, which I don't think was recently added. Technically, citations aren't required in the lead and I believe this is well enough supported in the body to be mentioned in the lead. Skyerise (talk) 11:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted. Since this is a BLP, such a contentious statement needs to be well-sourced and supported by consensus (since it's been challenged). It was recently added to the lead. The body content is not great other, leaning heavily on Talking Points Memo, a not terrible but obviously biased source.

The sources used in this proposed lead change are:

• An opinion piece in the Fayeteville Observer, obviously not usable
• A piece in The Urban News, a local news source of uncertain reliability
• A piece in the Washington Post that does not describe any of Robinson's comments as anti-Black
• The above-mentioned Talking Points Memo article

This is a person with tons of state-level coverage and solid amounts of national and international coverage. There are strong sources out there, and if they're not describing Robinson's statements as anti-Black, we shouldn't be either. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:27, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not up to Wiki writers to judge character. What you present as facts are not always so. 2603:8081:7E00:3B98:91FE:18F4:8141:3001 (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article offensively attacks Robinson's Christian faith using aggressive and negatively charged language,

For example, it uses phrases like anti-LGBTQ , instead it could say he holds traditional Christian values on gender and sexuality.

He doesn't identify as anti LGTBQ or anti-Semitic… only the phrases he uses to self identify himself should be used in this article Pch2024 (talk) 19:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Putting aside the fact that many RS characterize his comments as such; "He doesn't identify as anti LGTBQ" ---> "transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth. And yes I called it filth." Replace "transgenderism, homosexuality" with any other category and then explain how the statement is not in fact an articulation of an anti-[category] position. I'm not sure how that is biased or why anyone would have a problem with it. -Indy beetle (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The closing line, "... North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein made similar comments ...." needs to be made SPECIFIC - "similar anti-gay comments" or "similar criticsm of ant-gay comments". Thanks 68.100.227.7 (talk) 20:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Good catch. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:12, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple outlets are reporting about an impending CNN story that is said to be disastrous for his campaign. The Carolina Journal, which is heavily biased towards the NC GOP, is reporting that he is under pressure from his own staff and the Trump campaign to drop out. National Review is reporting this too, specifically that the story will be about "comments Robinson made in several online chatrooms".

Considering Robinson has been trailing in polls, and the fact that North Carolina seems to be a swing state for the race for President, it might be prudent to keep y'all's eye on this page.

One has to wonder how bad a story must be to get the NC GOP to advocate for a anti-LGBT, racist, anti-atheist, Islamophobic, antisemitic Holocaust denier to drop out. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remember WP:FORUM, but definitely worth keeping tabs on. Dingers5Days (talk) 17:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welp. It's here. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 20:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Holy fuck. Di (they-them) (talk) 20:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone else wants to look over what's been added so far, I'd appreciate it, as I'm still relatively new to Wikipedia, and I'm not super familiar with WP:BLP policy yet. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 20:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wowzers! You've done a very good job summarizing this astonishing material, Northern-Virginia-Photographer. Cullen328 (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I was glad I could get it done before the extended-protected status was applied. Absolutely crazy story. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, good job. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to interrupt the article building, but I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to realize that this article is going to become a magnet for all kinds of disruptive editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely no worry - I think you applied protection to the page at exactly the right time. The crux of the CNN article (and the politico one, which I'm just now reading myself) is on the page; I don't think there will be more details to add regarding this until the dust settles. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 22:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think the protection was timed well. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robinson's scandals are analogous to Doug Mastriano's scandals in 2022. Robinson can be labelled far-right for his espousal of Holocaust denial and Nazism (i.e. describing himself as a "Black Nazi"), not merely his right-wing policy views, as well as other other controversial statements that have been described as far-right. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say yes. A reliable source (CNN) said that he self-described himself as a Nazi, that's about as blatant as it gets. If a self-described Nazi isn't far-right, I don't know what is. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would feel better vis-a-vis WP:SYNTH if there was an article we could point to that describes him far-right, which I'm sure exists. Northern-Virginia-Photographer (talk) 23:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:REDFLAG and BLP we would need multiple independent reliable sources using that language for us to call him that in wiki-voice. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:14, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support finding multiple RS, which shouldn't be difficult given the lead already states he has promoted "far-right conspiracy theories." JohnAdams1800 (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the "far-right" description and included three sources that specifically describe him as such:

• United Press International (link) ([...]Robinson's frequently inflammatory public positions as a far-right conservative who is vehemently opposed gay and transgender rights.)
• The Nation (link) (North Carolina’s GOP Nominee for Governor Is a Far-Right Fanatic—and He’s Not Alone)
• The Advocate (magazine) (link) )[...]Mark Robinson, the far-right Republican and current North Carolina lieutenant governor[...])

Di (they-them) (talk) 03:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Di (they-them) UPI is a solid source. I have doubts about the Nation and the Advocate, neither of which are neutral and both have a reputation for being well to the left politically. The Nation in particular has been described in some more conservative sources as being far left. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged the claim for needing better sources. If someone wants to remove the claim for now, I have no objections. We need multiple high quality non-biased sources for this to fly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ad Orientem: The Nation is listed on WP:RSP as a reliable source. Di (they-them) (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Di (they-them) The quote from The Nation is from an op-ed piece. We don't typically accept those for making highly negative statements about someone in wiki-voice. I am not all sure about the Advocate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found another source:

• Huffpost (link) (The far-right conservative, who already has a long history of demeaning women and girls, allegedly described secretly “peeping” on women in public gym showers through vents.)

Di (they-them) (talk) 04:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably a better source. But I'm still uncomfortable using these kinds of terms in wiki-voice. Back when Fidel Castro died we had a huge debate over whether or not he could be called a "dictator" in wiki voice. There were scores of reliable sources so labeling him. But the community said we could not do so because the term was not being used unanimously. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:58, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Advocate should not be used to source any claim likely to be as contentious as this. It is a very political source. Huffpost I'd also be somewhat wary of. UPI I put more stock in. That said, I think we should avoid having the framework of "X person is an [insert ideological stance][ref][ref][ref] politician" in the very first sentence. It looks stupid, and we don't do that for many politicians, even controversial ones. Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are just "American politician"s in the first sentences of their articles. -Indy beetle (talk) 05:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]