Template:Did you know nominations/James Oakley (politician)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 01:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

James Oakley (politician)[edit]

(
)

Created by EdChem (talk). Self-nominated at 10:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Interesting hooks, but the article has a merge tag on it. Yoninah (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: The shooting of Benjamin Marconi article (the proposed merge target) also has a merge tag on it, and was run at DYK a few days ago. That generate one new !vote on the merge proposal, an oppose. I think that merging a biography into an article on the shooting murder of which he only commented would be a BLP violation. I do recognise that naming Oakley in these hooks might be a problem, and so note that they could be reworded as "an American politician" or "an American County Judge" (which is his title, though it would be controversial to use as his position as County Judge is much more a political role than a judicial one). Added ALT3 in this format, supported by Huffington Post article. Note that next PEC board meeting is on 17 Jan, so more news on the topic of ALT2 and article edits will be likely in the next few days. EdChem (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • This may indeed be this individual's principal claim to notoriety but doesn't it run afoul of the same BLP don't-be-negative issues as this review? — LlywelynII 13:44, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  • EdChem, it's been over a month since your last post. In the interim, it appears Oakley was stripped of his Board Vice President post at PEC and issued a warning, and that ended that, so I've struck ALT2 since it's now inaccurate as written. The article merge proposal has bogged down, but I don't see how it could close as a move; either oppose or no consensus seem the only two possibilities. The primary issue with this nomination remains the fact that all the proposed hooks violate BLP to one degree or other, and there almost certainly isn't a way to include the comment without violating BLP. Looking at the article, the only other hook possibilities I see involve the Wirtz Dam bridge or the Burnet County jail, and I'm not sure how strong they could be. It may be that it isn't possible to craft an interesting hook that doesn't run afoul of BLP concerns, in which case the article isn't eligible for DYK. This has been sitting for long enough, though, that we need you to respond now. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: I have not been sure what to do about the move request, which is part of why I haven't moved this forward (an explanation, not an excuse, FYI... I had wondered about posting at WT:DYK for any and all input on the move issue, so this nomination can be resolved – what do you think?). I think a move to the suggested target is impossible unless as a sentence or two, in which case a redirect from Oakley's name would be questionable. As far as different hooks goes, there are at least two other options I have thought about. Oakley was the first Republican elected as a commissioner to the seat he held since the civil war, which was a surprise to me, especially as it was in Texas. The sourcing for that is not great. The other I considered was when I was looking for more information on the PEC decision, and then got distracted again. There is a nearby Texas county refusing to take immigration detainees as a protest against Trump, and Oakley has been arguing for the Burnet County jail to take up the slack, which would be a financial benefit for the county as federal detainees pay substantially more per night to the county. It would be validation of Oakley's strategy for fixing the jail issue. Getting it into a hook might be a challenge though, 200-character wise. I have blood tests and medical appointments today, but will see what I can achieve in between. I appreciate the prompting and agree that it has gone too long, and understand that this may end up being rejected for DYK. EdChem (talk) 23:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @EdChem: - I just closed the merge discussion as no consensus as it completely stalled out. If you can address the other issues we should be able to get this nomination moving again. Mifter (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  • EdChem has not edited on Wikipedia since his post above on February 27. I do hope he's okay, but this nomination is the oldest one at DYK by far, and I think its time has run out. Marking for closure. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/James_Oakley_(politician)&oldid=945768779"