Talk:Mike Oliverio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'Tampering' section[edit]

I removed this section for two reasons. Firstly, I don't see that this is a particularly noteworthy event in Oliverio's career. If we ignore the fact that it's Wikipedia - suppose, for instance, it had been an incident on Yahoo answers - is it that significant? I feel not, though I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. Secondly, referring to it as 'tampering' doesn't seem justified. All we have from the source is that two editors, one an admin, disagreed with the edits - the version I removed seemed t imply that he'd done something wrong, not just that they thought so. If someone wants to reinstate the wording, please discuss it here first per WP:BLP.

Also, the section referred to "this Wikipedia article", which is a clear self-reference to avoid; but that in itself is obviously not a reason for wholesale removal. Olaf Davis (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added {{onlinesource}} so there's documentation about this. I would lean toward not including this in the article itself, as it's not likely to be a significant part of Oliverio's biography, unless it becomes an external issue in the near future. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, I feel that the information is relevant; I admit the article needs enlargement in general, but this is an article in a major local paper about the guy's own campaign manager removing embarassing facts from the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, neither the fact that his campaign office sought to manage his Wikipedia article, nor the fact that some political opponent may have sought to color the article, nor the fact that the press picked up on it, is surprising in American politics any longer. Without real-world consequences beyond this one newspaper article, I don't think a section on it is justified in such a short article, though expanding the article would help with some of that. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The talk page tag is good enough here. Guy (Help!) 14:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ALEC[edit]

So is his other public service (including the American Legislative Exchange Council) mentioned at this primary source appropriate to mention? Listing all of the associated republicans comes across as leading the reader but some mention seems appropriate.Cptnono (talk) 04:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the article a little bit earlier this evening to help address this problem. Brian Powell (talk) 04:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh it is right there. Sorry about that.Cptnono (talk) 04:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps someone who suggested on his Twitter page that it may be "God's will" for Oliverio to be elected[1] shouldn't be the one making such drastic edits to the candidate's Wikipedia page. I have restored the original quotations you removed. 24.3.220.206 (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I tweet things I find interesting. My tweet was in context with a newspaper article [2] where Oliverio was quoted as saying that. And I'm not doing things here anonymously and hiding behind IP addresses. Brian Powell (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So that somehow explains why you removed obviously valid information that people do, indeed, talk about? Oliverio's attendance at the Family Policy Council event is acceptable to be posted. Additionally, Doug McKinney's comment that he's been trying to get Oliverio to become a Republican is acceptable as well. You're removing well-documented, well-sourced information. I'll be restoring it. But, thanks for admitting your inference that it's "God's will" for Oliverio to be elected. 24.3.220.206 (talk) 15:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I never indicated I felt it was "God's will" that Oliverio be elected. I personally find the suggestion hilarious. That was a comment he made himself - see the article I linked. Wikipedia is not a place for diatribes - keep the quotes in the article direct and to the point. Brian Powell (talk) 04:34, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, Oliverio just made the same comment about his campaign being "in God's hands" again. His statement, not mine. [3] Brian Powell (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent additions to the article are quite acceptable. Thank you! 24.3.220.206 (talk) 17:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

A few editors are deliberately removing accurate and sourced information rather than providing their own accurate and sourced information. If users are concerned about the neutrality of this page, then they should include their own "positive" citations about the subject. Removing events or features about the subject that are well-documented in newspapers is unacceptable. BMPowell insists that this information be removed; however, you won't find me removing well-documented facts about Congressman Alan Mollohan from his entry though they may be perceived as negative. 24.3.220.206 (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The NPOV tag is used to discuss specific information in the article and whether to keep, remove or rewrite it, not to complain about the behavior of other editors. I will remove any NPOV tag from the article unless specific content-specific issues have been posted here on the talk page along with the addition of the tag. Yworo (talk) 15:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mike Oliverio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:19, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mike_Oliverio&oldid=1200833574"