![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Alexfro essentially sanitized the article using material from the offical Steven Rattner website. Some of the maaterial removed was:
On April 15, 2010, Quadrangle stated, "We wholly disavow the conduct engaged in by Steve Rattner, who hired the New York State Comptroller’s political consultant, Hank Morris, to arrange an investment from the New York State Common Retirement Fund. That conduct was inappropriate, wrong, and unethical." as it agreed to a $7 million fine. [1]
"On January 14, 2005, the Good Times CEO sent an email to Rattner reporting that Good Times was moving forward with the Chooch distribution deal and “wanted to bring it to [his] attention as a potential relationship issue.” Rattner forwarded the email to Morris, telling him, “This is Steve Loglisci’s project. Wanted you to be aware.”" Morris told Rattner to contribute to Hevesi indirectly. "Thereafter, Rattner asked a Democratic donor he knew to contribute to Hevesi. That person and his wife each subsequently gave approximately $25,000 to Hevesi for New York. Shortly thereafter, the CRF increased its investment in QCPII from $100 million to $150 million." [2]
and added material such as:
After leaving the government, Ratter wrote his New York Times best selling account of the successful rescue of the auto companies. Slate described his book as "unquestionably the best book so far about the Obama presidency."<ref>[
Can Alexfro explain if they are a neutral editor, or are they affliated with Steven Rattner or his book publisher in any way? {{subst:UnsignedIP|1=71.200.18.45|2=13:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)}}
Added references and wiki link to wife. Bearian 19:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how who Rattner dated "briefly" has any bearing at all on this article, nor does who introduced him and his wife. Adding that info implies that there is some sort of connection to the reporting or the scandal, and that is somewhere between WP:SYNTHESIS and POV pushing. We don't mention people's dating history, except for celebrities for whom their dating history is an important part of what makes them notable. I strongly recommend this information be pulled, but don't wish to edit war, so I'd like to see what other editors have to say here. Qwyrxian ( talk) 23:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you point me to the policy saying editors should not include information on the dating history of important public officials, especially when it is a matter of public record? His ties to the Times certainly make him notable, and they are always reported in articles on Rattner. The social dimensions of those ties are not as widely discussed, but they are also extremely important when considering his career, and a matter of public record. I'm not sure why this information has raised your hackles. Why should celebrities be subjected to paparazzi-like scrutiny of their personal lives, but not public officials? The personal relationships of public officials are far more consequential for the rest of us. I'm not saying that all personal info on public officials is fair game, just that you haven't begun to make a convincing argument that folks like Rattner should be treated differently from other celebrities.
Joysent (
talk)
19:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Alexfro essentially sanitized the article using material from the offical Steven Rattner website. Some of the maaterial removed was:
On April 15, 2010, Quadrangle stated, "We wholly disavow the conduct engaged in by Steve Rattner, who hired the New York State Comptroller’s political consultant, Hank Morris, to arrange an investment from the New York State Common Retirement Fund. That conduct was inappropriate, wrong, and unethical." as it agreed to a $7 million fine. [1]
"On January 14, 2005, the Good Times CEO sent an email to Rattner reporting that Good Times was moving forward with the Chooch distribution deal and “wanted to bring it to [his] attention as a potential relationship issue.” Rattner forwarded the email to Morris, telling him, “This is Steve Loglisci’s project. Wanted you to be aware.”" Morris told Rattner to contribute to Hevesi indirectly. "Thereafter, Rattner asked a Democratic donor he knew to contribute to Hevesi. That person and his wife each subsequently gave approximately $25,000 to Hevesi for New York. Shortly thereafter, the CRF increased its investment in QCPII from $100 million to $150 million." [2]
and added material such as:
After leaving the government, Ratter wrote his New York Times best selling account of the successful rescue of the auto companies. Slate described his book as "unquestionably the best book so far about the Obama presidency."<ref>[
Can Alexfro explain if they are a neutral editor, or are they affliated with Steven Rattner or his book publisher in any way? {{subst:UnsignedIP|1=71.200.18.45|2=13:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)}}
Added references and wiki link to wife. Bearian 19:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how who Rattner dated "briefly" has any bearing at all on this article, nor does who introduced him and his wife. Adding that info implies that there is some sort of connection to the reporting or the scandal, and that is somewhere between WP:SYNTHESIS and POV pushing. We don't mention people's dating history, except for celebrities for whom their dating history is an important part of what makes them notable. I strongly recommend this information be pulled, but don't wish to edit war, so I'd like to see what other editors have to say here. Qwyrxian ( talk) 23:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you point me to the policy saying editors should not include information on the dating history of important public officials, especially when it is a matter of public record? His ties to the Times certainly make him notable, and they are always reported in articles on Rattner. The social dimensions of those ties are not as widely discussed, but they are also extremely important when considering his career, and a matter of public record. I'm not sure why this information has raised your hackles. Why should celebrities be subjected to paparazzi-like scrutiny of their personal lives, but not public officials? The personal relationships of public officials are far more consequential for the rest of us. I'm not saying that all personal info on public officials is fair game, just that you haven't begun to make a convincing argument that folks like Rattner should be treated differently from other celebrities.
Joysent (
talk)
19:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)