Talk:Former US President Donald Trump pleads not guilty over alleged attempts to 'subvert' 2020 presidential election results

Notes

• There are invisible comments indicating the use of related news for sourcing.
• This will almost definitely be refocused to the arraignment, which will be at 20:00 UTC. Heavy Water (talk) 15:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

• The background basically relies on NBC and the indictment itself embedded therein (and, unfortunately, that PDF is not string-searchable...I can severely reduce the background if the reviewer wishes). Heavy Water (talk) 15:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
• Additionally, the Reuters source is needed only for Friday night's filing, and the August 4 NBC source for DeSantis' reaction. I don't consider either of those developments to impact this focus' freshness, but I wanted to include them. Heavy Water (talk) 15:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Question

@Heavy Water: I'm looking for the quote from Lauro in the 4th paragraph, it's definitely verifiable (see, e.g., CNN), though I'm not seeing it in the sources on the article. Part of it shows up on the Politico article. I'm not totally sure if I'm just missing it on the "microblog" NBC News article or elsewhere or if a source is missing. —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 04:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@Chaetodipus: The AP's "Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 election" verifies "somewhat absurd" and "These are weighty issues. Obviously, the U.S. has had three years to investigate this matter", then Politico verifies "All I'm going to ask, Your Honor, is the opportunity to fairly defend our client. But in order to do that, we're going to need a little time." Heavy Water (talk) 05:20, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks like AP doesn't continue the quote from there, "[...] and also there’s a number of agents and lawyers that are assisting the government in this proceeding." —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 05:31, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Review of revision 4740689 [Passed]

Revision 4740689 of this article has been reviewed by Chaetodipus (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 08:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: A very thorough article on the indictment and the context The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4740689 of this article has been reviewed by Chaetodipus (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 08:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: A very thorough article on the indictment and the context The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Thank you. That's what I was aiming for. The unverifiable portion of the Lauro quote must have gotten lost when a source/sources "updated" themselves. The second one must have gotten lost when I was removing (supposedly) extraneous sources to refocus. The error in the date of the indictment and this are entirely my fault. Heavy Water (talk) 14:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I was thinking about the "Pence certified the results" thing (obviously misleading). I think I was intending to say he certified (not in its meaning specific to this situation, but along the lines of "attest to") Congress' certification, but I botched it. Heavy Water (talk) 05:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

I suppose ultimately though Pence did sign off on it, but yeah it was sort of misrepresenting the process. I'm annoyed with myself for missing the dates and failing to remove the unverified part of the quote, though it probably would have been fine to keep if thar AP article was added to the sources. —chaetodipus (talk · contribs) 06:48, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

This is just a comment as I archive this. Using live updated sources does not seem like the best practice. By their very nature they constantly change. --SVTCobra 02:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)