![]() | Mark Udall received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The page is now protected for seven days days. During this time, please try and find common ground and arrive to a version that all can live with. If you cannot, this is a good time to pursue dispute resolution such as third opinions or requests for comments. If you are ready to resume editing or to contest the protection, place a request at WP:RFPP. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC) ]]
There is no source that says that Mark Udall was raised Presbyterian. As his father, Mo Udall, was a Mormon, one would assume he was raised in the same church as his father. However, I don't understand why that is listed, as he currently is unaffiliated (which probably means he's a closeted atheist}.
This article reads like a campaign ad, especially when compared to his opponent's. Most of the pro-Udall fluff appears to have been recently added by a SPA User:Mister.bryan.kelley. Any thoughts on how to make this article more balanced? Newguy34 ( talk) 22:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
This reads like it was written by a Udall staffer, or a very biased Wikipedia user who is a staunch Udall supporter. This is far from a NPOV article. It must change. DavidSteinle ( talk) 04:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Much of the article is a simple statements of fact. Such as how he voted,etc. Those are facts that can be checked. So quit complaining and just check the facts. If they are wrong, then dispute them.
When the article says "he accomplished many important goals, including expanding the program's minority outreach," the article is in direct violation of NPOV. "Accomplishing goals" is a passive statement, in that it ignores the question of whose goals Udall accomplished. Instead, why not just state that he was responsible for expanding Outward Bound's minority outreach program, rather than saying it was one of his personal goals? Cjax ( talk) 06:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Considering the fact that Colorado Senator Ken Salazar is leaving his post to be in Obama's cabinet, should there be mention that Mark Udall will ultimately become the senior senator from Colorado very soon after taking office? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.57.93 ( talk) 03:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
There is significant vandalism being conducted on this page in wake of Udall's 2014 reelection campaign. A user named CFredkin has repeatedly inserted biased text that violates Wikipedia's POV standards. This included adding an entirely new section titled "Colorado Division of Insurance" that focused exclusively on an incident in which Udall attempted to get the Division of Insurance to change the basis for what was considered a cancelled health insurance plan in Colorado. The text as CFredkin wrote it did not mention that Udall and his office was cleared of wrongdoing in this incident after an investigation. It also did not include the basis for Udall's request, which is that 175,000 of the 250,000 Coloradans who received "cancelled" plans had in fact received alternative plans from their insurer to sign up with. Whether or not Udall was right in his actions is for readers to decide, but not mentioning any of Udall's perspective is downright dishonest. Additionally, some of the primary sources for the section were Daily Caller articles, an extremely biased conservative site that does not meet Wikipedia's standards for a reliable source. I have since rewritten the section to offer both viewpoints, moved it to be next to Udall's ACA vote, and removed the biased sources. However, other edits seem to be taking place on this page that seem decidedly one-sided, as though a "hit job" of sorts was being done on the page. It may get to the point where it is worth locking to prevent further vandalism. Thoughts? Cat spasms ( talk) 07:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
User:Grammarxxx has recently made some changes to the article: [1]. I've taken issue with these changes, and they've been added back. Let's have a discussion here rather than a slow motion edit war.
Champaign Supernova ( talk) 18:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Actually a tremendous amount of additional well-sourced content was removed, while unsourced content was added. I'd suggest more discussion on these changes (as described in WP:BRD) before attempting to restore them. CFredkin ( talk) 16:47, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
User:Grammarxxx, There is no consensus for your BOLD edits. You need to make the case for them here per WP:BRD. Thank you. CFredkin ( talk) 22:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay, there's a long list of changes to discuss. I'll start from the top.
From the lead (issue: this is entirely unsourced. A lead is the place to summarize the main themes of the article. They are clearly not main themes if there are no sources.
A member of the Democratic Party, throughout his career he had proposed legislation to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect natural resources. Udall has been praised for his successful legislation, converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge.
"Udall has a strong record of supporting environmental causes..." This violates WP:NPOV. The two given sources Environment Colorado and Grist, are probably not reliable.
The long quote from Udall via the NSA: work it into the body, or let's not include it. We're giving it special significance by putting it in a quote box--it's WP:UNDUE. Why is this quote particularly notable?
"Udall has been a fierce opponent of the National Security Agency's (NSA) mass surveillance programs, and has been a consistent supporter of civil liberties." Just no. "Fierce opponent?" C'mon. That is not objective. And nowhere in the given citation does it even say the phrase "civil liberties" so we definitely don't have enough sourcing to make that claim.
The picture of Udall climbing a mountain: why would we put that in the political positions section? If it's in the article, it should go in the personal life section, where his mountaineering is discussed.
These are just a handful of the issues with recent edits, but it's a start. Champaign Supernova ( talk) 22:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Also, removing a reference to the "Employee Free Choice Act" because it's the only sentence in a section is not a valid rationale.
"Mass surveillance" is not an appropriate header for the section with the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act encompasses more than just surveillance.
Sub-sections in the Political Positions section should be in alpha order. CFredkin ( talk) 23:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, people have issue with the bold edits I've been making, so let's talk them out here and try to make the article better. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 23:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
... What is the issue? He is a Democrat, he has proposed green energy bills throughout his career (sourced in the article), he did proposed legislation to turn a weapons facility into a national park (sourced), and he has attempted to protect natural resources ((fracking and the pine beetle)sourced).
Mark Emery Udall (born July 18, 1950) is an American politician and the senior United States Senator from Colorado, in office since 2009. He served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Colorado's 2nd congressional district. Prior to being elected to Congress, he represented parts of Boulder, Colorado in the Colorado House of Representatives. A member of the Democratic Party, he has worked to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect privacy rights. His legislative achievements include converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Born in Tucson, Arizona, he is the son of former U.S. Representative Morris "Mo" Udall. A member of the Udall family, a western American political family, his relatives include New Mexico's Tom Udall and Utah's Mike Lee.
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The issue regarding the lede has been resolved. This compromise was reached.
Mark Emery Udall (born July 18, 1950) is an American politician and the senior United States Senator from Colorado, in office since 2009. He served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Colorado's 2nd congressional district. Prior to being elected to Congress, he represented parts of Boulder, Colorado in the Colorado House of Representatives.
As a Democrat, Udall has worked to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect privacy rights. His legislative achievements include converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Born in Tucson, Arizona, he is the son of former U.S. Representative Morris "Mo" Udall. As a part of the Udall family, a western American political family, his relatives include New Mexico's Tom Udall and Utah's Mike Lee.
Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 00:21, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, lets break this down by section.
Udall has a long record of supporting environmental issues, including renewable energy, expanding expand national parks, and addressing climate change. [3] [4]
What's wrong, it's cited and all.
References
In 2009, Mark along with his Senator cousin Tom Udall were awarded The Environmental Law Institute's Award for Achievement in Environmental Law, Policy, and Management for their work "advancing environmental protection." [2] In 2010, Udall was awarded the Bruce F. Vento Public Service Award by the National Park Trust, highlighting his successful work to convert the Rocky Flats Plant in northern Colorado into a wildlife refuge. [3] Udall has a lifetime rating of 97% from the League of Conservation Voters. [4]
What's the issue here? Naming group awards is the norm in other articles. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 01:01, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
References
Believing his state is especially connected to the environment, Udall has said "there isn't a Coloradan out there who doesn't cycle, hunt, hike... We're an outdoor state. It fits our worldview, and it’s how we define ourselves.” [7]
I get why people think this is POV, but I see it that, since it's in the environment section, it gives a good contrast to his connection to his state which is very connected to it's environment.
References
In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed by a wide margin. [1]
References
Please, tell me. What's wrong with this? It is properly sourced. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 01:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
As it is and always has existed, the Unions section on Udall's page is one sentence. This sentence exists only to say he voted against unions, and should be removed or seriously beefed up, as it gives WP:UNDUE weight to the subject. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 18:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I just removed this because it failed verification:
"In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed by a wide margin." [4]
The given source is about Tom Udall introducing an RES. It says nothing about a Colorado ballot measure, a 10% renewable mandate, or passage by a wide margin. Champaign Supernova ( talk) 12:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok just for grins I'd like to understand the sequence of events that led to the edit. You
(1) read the source;
(2) saw the numbers 52% to 48%;
(3) did not see the language less than an inch away describing that as a "close margin";
(4) instead decided for yourself that 52 to 48% was a wide margin, and committed that to prose in WP's voice;
(5) did not bother to investigate when
another editor also told you that the source didn't call it a "wide margin";
(6) went ahead and
reverted that editor anyway;
(7) did not bother to even read the source when
I pointed out to you what it actually said ("close margin");
(8) went ahead and
reverted me anyway;
(9) helpfully
pointed out at talk that I could simply go ahead and make the edit which you had just reverted;
(10) complained
that this line of objection amounted to a personal attack;
(11) finally appeared to acknowledge for the first time that the source described 52% to 48% as a "close margin", and added (helpfully!)
that you would not object to that sourced description being added.;
Do I have that about right?
Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)
(talk)
(contribs)
18:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative (Amendment 37) to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed 52% to 48%. [1] [2] [3]
References
The material above was deleted by NazariyKaminski with the edit summary of "Failed verification". The sources provided say otherwise. - Cwobeel (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
How about getting into a huge discussion, we settle on naming the section, "Firearms"? Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 22:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Why a lien on Udall campaign is relevant to this biography? That material may be suited to the campaign article, but not here. Please respect WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE- Cwobeel (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I mean, seriously?
Republicans had a field day today with news that U.S. Sen. Mark Udall’s campaign was hit with a tax lien for failing to pay unemployment insurance to the state of Colorado. The Denver Business Journal reported that Mark Udall for Colorado Inc. owed $458. The lien was filed on Feb. 4, recorded on Feb. 10 and lifted on Valentine’s Day [ed. February 14], according to the campaign
- Cwobeel (talk) 15:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
@ Factchecker atyourservice: - Do you really believe that this is a relevant issue for this article? Really? - Cwobeel (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, Cwobeel, but I don't see anything worthy of invoking BLP policy here. That being said, I see this as an extremely trivial matter and would omit the lien reference for that reason alone in the absence of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Given that this issue has been covered by one or more reliable sources in the context of the 2014 campaign, perhaps it deserves a short sentence or two in the election article, but I don't feel that strongly about including it there, either. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:24, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
First, the sentence "A member of the Democratic Party, ..." implies that these are the Universal positions of the Democratic Party, rather than the Individual positions of the Senator and that he is just toeing the line. Second, that is not a balanced representation of the Senator's time in politics by a long shot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldencanon ( talk • contribs)
I don't give a damn whether or not it says he is a Democrat. I care that it implies Universal positions of the Democratic Party that not every Democrat subscribes to and that is it gives an unbalanced representation of the Senator's time in politics. Senator Mark Udall also has a verified record of raising taxes and opposing gun rights, yet I cannot help but notice that that was left wide out of the Lede... Take that sentence out and let people read up on things for themselves. I'm with the word "Democrat" gone from the Lede if it will make you happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldencanon ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Might just be increased election cycle activity, but I feel like this page is bloating beyond control. I trimmed a bit from the personal life section. Removed info about a hike in which another hiker died (tragic, but this is Udall's page, not theirs), and mostly lots of fluff sentences that don't do any encyclopedic work: i.e. "In 1986, Udall and wife went on a hike." Removed quote about Coloradans that doesn't seem to pertain to Udall's personal life (it would be great on Colorado's page). Kept info about Udall relative that died, since this whole page highlights the broader Udall clan. The section isn't perfect, but hopefully we can keep working on it. Kept the golf stuff for the time being because I've already cut a lot, but worry that it is just trivia and might have to go. Shatterpoint05 ( talk) 04:46, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Udall. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:35, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Mark Udall received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The page is now protected for seven days days. During this time, please try and find common ground and arrive to a version that all can live with. If you cannot, this is a good time to pursue dispute resolution such as third opinions or requests for comments. If you are ready to resume editing or to contest the protection, place a request at WP:RFPP. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC) ]]
There is no source that says that Mark Udall was raised Presbyterian. As his father, Mo Udall, was a Mormon, one would assume he was raised in the same church as his father. However, I don't understand why that is listed, as he currently is unaffiliated (which probably means he's a closeted atheist}.
This article reads like a campaign ad, especially when compared to his opponent's. Most of the pro-Udall fluff appears to have been recently added by a SPA User:Mister.bryan.kelley. Any thoughts on how to make this article more balanced? Newguy34 ( talk) 22:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
This reads like it was written by a Udall staffer, or a very biased Wikipedia user who is a staunch Udall supporter. This is far from a NPOV article. It must change. DavidSteinle ( talk) 04:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Much of the article is a simple statements of fact. Such as how he voted,etc. Those are facts that can be checked. So quit complaining and just check the facts. If they are wrong, then dispute them.
When the article says "he accomplished many important goals, including expanding the program's minority outreach," the article is in direct violation of NPOV. "Accomplishing goals" is a passive statement, in that it ignores the question of whose goals Udall accomplished. Instead, why not just state that he was responsible for expanding Outward Bound's minority outreach program, rather than saying it was one of his personal goals? Cjax ( talk) 06:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Considering the fact that Colorado Senator Ken Salazar is leaving his post to be in Obama's cabinet, should there be mention that Mark Udall will ultimately become the senior senator from Colorado very soon after taking office? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.57.93 ( talk) 03:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
There is significant vandalism being conducted on this page in wake of Udall's 2014 reelection campaign. A user named CFredkin has repeatedly inserted biased text that violates Wikipedia's POV standards. This included adding an entirely new section titled "Colorado Division of Insurance" that focused exclusively on an incident in which Udall attempted to get the Division of Insurance to change the basis for what was considered a cancelled health insurance plan in Colorado. The text as CFredkin wrote it did not mention that Udall and his office was cleared of wrongdoing in this incident after an investigation. It also did not include the basis for Udall's request, which is that 175,000 of the 250,000 Coloradans who received "cancelled" plans had in fact received alternative plans from their insurer to sign up with. Whether or not Udall was right in his actions is for readers to decide, but not mentioning any of Udall's perspective is downright dishonest. Additionally, some of the primary sources for the section were Daily Caller articles, an extremely biased conservative site that does not meet Wikipedia's standards for a reliable source. I have since rewritten the section to offer both viewpoints, moved it to be next to Udall's ACA vote, and removed the biased sources. However, other edits seem to be taking place on this page that seem decidedly one-sided, as though a "hit job" of sorts was being done on the page. It may get to the point where it is worth locking to prevent further vandalism. Thoughts? Cat spasms ( talk) 07:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
User:Grammarxxx has recently made some changes to the article: [1]. I've taken issue with these changes, and they've been added back. Let's have a discussion here rather than a slow motion edit war.
Champaign Supernova ( talk) 18:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Actually a tremendous amount of additional well-sourced content was removed, while unsourced content was added. I'd suggest more discussion on these changes (as described in WP:BRD) before attempting to restore them. CFredkin ( talk) 16:47, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
User:Grammarxxx, There is no consensus for your BOLD edits. You need to make the case for them here per WP:BRD. Thank you. CFredkin ( talk) 22:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay, there's a long list of changes to discuss. I'll start from the top.
From the lead (issue: this is entirely unsourced. A lead is the place to summarize the main themes of the article. They are clearly not main themes if there are no sources.
A member of the Democratic Party, throughout his career he had proposed legislation to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect natural resources. Udall has been praised for his successful legislation, converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge.
"Udall has a strong record of supporting environmental causes..." This violates WP:NPOV. The two given sources Environment Colorado and Grist, are probably not reliable.
The long quote from Udall via the NSA: work it into the body, or let's not include it. We're giving it special significance by putting it in a quote box--it's WP:UNDUE. Why is this quote particularly notable?
"Udall has been a fierce opponent of the National Security Agency's (NSA) mass surveillance programs, and has been a consistent supporter of civil liberties." Just no. "Fierce opponent?" C'mon. That is not objective. And nowhere in the given citation does it even say the phrase "civil liberties" so we definitely don't have enough sourcing to make that claim.
The picture of Udall climbing a mountain: why would we put that in the political positions section? If it's in the article, it should go in the personal life section, where his mountaineering is discussed.
These are just a handful of the issues with recent edits, but it's a start. Champaign Supernova ( talk) 22:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Also, removing a reference to the "Employee Free Choice Act" because it's the only sentence in a section is not a valid rationale.
"Mass surveillance" is not an appropriate header for the section with the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act encompasses more than just surveillance.
Sub-sections in the Political Positions section should be in alpha order. CFredkin ( talk) 23:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, people have issue with the bold edits I've been making, so let's talk them out here and try to make the article better. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 23:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
... What is the issue? He is a Democrat, he has proposed green energy bills throughout his career (sourced in the article), he did proposed legislation to turn a weapons facility into a national park (sourced), and he has attempted to protect natural resources ((fracking and the pine beetle)sourced).
Mark Emery Udall (born July 18, 1950) is an American politician and the senior United States Senator from Colorado, in office since 2009. He served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Colorado's 2nd congressional district. Prior to being elected to Congress, he represented parts of Boulder, Colorado in the Colorado House of Representatives. A member of the Democratic Party, he has worked to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect privacy rights. His legislative achievements include converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Born in Tucson, Arizona, he is the son of former U.S. Representative Morris "Mo" Udall. A member of the Udall family, a western American political family, his relatives include New Mexico's Tom Udall and Utah's Mike Lee.
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The issue regarding the lede has been resolved. This compromise was reached.
Mark Emery Udall (born July 18, 1950) is an American politician and the senior United States Senator from Colorado, in office since 2009. He served in the United States House of Representatives, representing Colorado's 2nd congressional district. Prior to being elected to Congress, he represented parts of Boulder, Colorado in the Colorado House of Representatives.
As a Democrat, Udall has worked to support renewable energy, expand national parks, and protect privacy rights. His legislative achievements include converting the once Rocky Flats Weapons Facility into the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. Born in Tucson, Arizona, he is the son of former U.S. Representative Morris "Mo" Udall. As a part of the Udall family, a western American political family, his relatives include New Mexico's Tom Udall and Utah's Mike Lee.
Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 00:21, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, lets break this down by section.
Udall has a long record of supporting environmental issues, including renewable energy, expanding expand national parks, and addressing climate change. [3] [4]
What's wrong, it's cited and all.
References
In 2009, Mark along with his Senator cousin Tom Udall were awarded The Environmental Law Institute's Award for Achievement in Environmental Law, Policy, and Management for their work "advancing environmental protection." [2] In 2010, Udall was awarded the Bruce F. Vento Public Service Award by the National Park Trust, highlighting his successful work to convert the Rocky Flats Plant in northern Colorado into a wildlife refuge. [3] Udall has a lifetime rating of 97% from the League of Conservation Voters. [4]
What's the issue here? Naming group awards is the norm in other articles. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 01:01, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
References
Believing his state is especially connected to the environment, Udall has said "there isn't a Coloradan out there who doesn't cycle, hunt, hike... We're an outdoor state. It fits our worldview, and it’s how we define ourselves.” [7]
I get why people think this is POV, but I see it that, since it's in the environment section, it gives a good contrast to his connection to his state which is very connected to it's environment.
References
In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed by a wide margin. [1]
References
Please, tell me. What's wrong with this? It is properly sourced. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 01:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
As it is and always has existed, the Unions section on Udall's page is one sentence. This sentence exists only to say he voted against unions, and should be removed or seriously beefed up, as it gives WP:UNDUE weight to the subject. Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 18:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I just removed this because it failed verification:
"In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed by a wide margin." [4]
The given source is about Tom Udall introducing an RES. It says nothing about a Colorado ballot measure, a 10% renewable mandate, or passage by a wide margin. Champaign Supernova ( talk) 12:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok just for grins I'd like to understand the sequence of events that led to the edit. You
(1) read the source;
(2) saw the numbers 52% to 48%;
(3) did not see the language less than an inch away describing that as a "close margin";
(4) instead decided for yourself that 52 to 48% was a wide margin, and committed that to prose in WP's voice;
(5) did not bother to investigate when
another editor also told you that the source didn't call it a "wide margin";
(6) went ahead and
reverted that editor anyway;
(7) did not bother to even read the source when
I pointed out to you what it actually said ("close margin");
(8) went ahead and
reverted me anyway;
(9) helpfully
pointed out at talk that I could simply go ahead and make the edit which you had just reverted;
(10) complained
that this line of objection amounted to a personal attack;
(11) finally appeared to acknowledge for the first time that the source described 52% to 48% as a "close margin", and added (helpfully!)
that you would not object to that sourced description being added.;
Do I have that about right?
Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)
(talk)
(contribs)
18:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
In 2004, Udall helped lead a statewide ballot initiative (Amendment 37) to adopt the Renewable Electricity Standard, a standard he originally introduced in the Colorado House of Representatives. Working with the Republican Colorado House Speaker, the measure mandating 10% of energy consumed be from renewable sources, passed 52% to 48%. [1] [2] [3]
References
The material above was deleted by NazariyKaminski with the edit summary of "Failed verification". The sources provided say otherwise. - Cwobeel (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
How about getting into a huge discussion, we settle on naming the section, "Firearms"? Grammarxxx ( What'd I do this time?) 22:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Why a lien on Udall campaign is relevant to this biography? That material may be suited to the campaign article, but not here. Please respect WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE- Cwobeel (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I mean, seriously?
Republicans had a field day today with news that U.S. Sen. Mark Udall’s campaign was hit with a tax lien for failing to pay unemployment insurance to the state of Colorado. The Denver Business Journal reported that Mark Udall for Colorado Inc. owed $458. The lien was filed on Feb. 4, recorded on Feb. 10 and lifted on Valentine’s Day [ed. February 14], according to the campaign
- Cwobeel (talk) 15:42, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
@ Factchecker atyourservice: - Do you really believe that this is a relevant issue for this article? Really? - Cwobeel (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, Cwobeel, but I don't see anything worthy of invoking BLP policy here. That being said, I see this as an extremely trivial matter and would omit the lien reference for that reason alone in the absence of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Given that this issue has been covered by one or more reliable sources in the context of the 2014 campaign, perhaps it deserves a short sentence or two in the election article, but I don't feel that strongly about including it there, either. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 16:24, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
First, the sentence "A member of the Democratic Party, ..." implies that these are the Universal positions of the Democratic Party, rather than the Individual positions of the Senator and that he is just toeing the line. Second, that is not a balanced representation of the Senator's time in politics by a long shot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldencanon ( talk • contribs)
I don't give a damn whether or not it says he is a Democrat. I care that it implies Universal positions of the Democratic Party that not every Democrat subscribes to and that is it gives an unbalanced representation of the Senator's time in politics. Senator Mark Udall also has a verified record of raising taxes and opposing gun rights, yet I cannot help but notice that that was left wide out of the Lede... Take that sentence out and let people read up on things for themselves. I'm with the word "Democrat" gone from the Lede if it will make you happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldencanon ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Might just be increased election cycle activity, but I feel like this page is bloating beyond control. I trimmed a bit from the personal life section. Removed info about a hike in which another hiker died (tragic, but this is Udall's page, not theirs), and mostly lots of fluff sentences that don't do any encyclopedic work: i.e. "In 1986, Udall and wife went on a hike." Removed quote about Coloradans that doesn't seem to pertain to Udall's personal life (it would be great on Colorado's page). Kept info about Udall relative that died, since this whole page highlights the broader Udall clan. The section isn't perfect, but hopefully we can keep working on it. Kept the golf stuff for the time being because I've already cut a lot, but worry that it is just trivia and might have to go. Shatterpoint05 ( talk) 04:46, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Udall. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:35, 3 June 2017 (UTC)