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. |
Archive 1 |
I just wanted to bring light to the fact that this article claims that William Jefferson's district was the 3rd most democratic in the south but the Cao article says that it is the most democratic in the nation. The both use the number +D28. Both cannot be true. I also raised this question in the Cao article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Curtbash ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Problem resolved Curtbash ( talk) 08:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like the guy got caught up in a Nigerian letter scam. Bringing broadband services to Nigeria? Mountains of cash stored in fridges? Weird. See [1]
I took out the comment about 'dollar bill', its a cheap insult that diminishes the following paragraph on the criminal investigation. This guy is going down, there is no need to make a cheap insult, facts and indictments speak much louder. -- Gorgonzilla 01:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
So, I put in an edit in which I said Bill was the first African American elected to a state office since Reconstruction. Which was how, as I recall, during his campaign we worked on things. Not to dismiss Sidney Bartholemew, but he's Creole, which in New Orleans and Louisiana politics is an entirely different thing. Also, in my edit, I mentioned that Bill was a Republican, which was also edited out. So ... discuss? Tall Girl 07:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Tall Girl 07:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Tall Girl 23:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually the fact that a pol calls a press conference to announce that they are not going to resign is pretty much the most significant thing they can do career wise short of actually resigning.
It is usually followed by another press conference...-- Gorgonzilla 20:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
The text of the speech is available on TPM http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000656.php. Even though this is a partisan source it is partisan left and Jefferson is a Democrat. -- Gorgonzilla 22:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the following from the "External links" section because it's not linked to anything external to Wikipedia (and even then, only the date).
Perhaps whoever added it meant it to be a "Reference"? If so, add it back in an appropriate section. - dcljr ( talk) 01:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Why did we just eliminate all the information about the current investigation? Chadlupkes 19:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
That was User:Nolagrl with a total of three edits, using all three to delete negative data and add "positive" (pity poor me type) unsourced data. WAS 4.250 22:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Why was {{Project Congress}} deleted? It's being added to all the folks who have served in Congress. -- Sholom 03:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Please, nothing is so urgent that you can't wait more than a day. As someone else said, this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. We have to get it right, not get it first. Let's all try to slow things down a bit.
The off-line source is definitely authentic; I looked it up via microfilm at the library I work at and read it myself. It's a biographical profile of Jefferson written by the Times Picayune - the New Orleans daily newspaper - during his campaign for mayor in 1986. Aside from campaign material put out by Jefferson himself (which likely to be biased), it's the best source for his early life that I've been able to find. -- Praxedis G 11:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm not pro-Republican, although I've been balancing the anti- Dennis Hastert reports with the DOJ denials. And I'm not pro-Democratic, although I changed "caught ... taking a bribe" to "filmed ... receiving" the money.
I just think we should avoid taking sides. Let the facts speak for themselves.
The FBI says they have Jefferson on film taking money. Fine, maybe that will be evidence in a case, or maybe he'll cop a plea. We are in no hurry, we do not need to prejudge him. Any more than we have to prejudge Hastert. Take it easy, slow down, and be accurate. Only newspapers have to "get it first". We are an encyclopedia, we have to "get it right". -- Uncle Ed 20:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm new here, but on the subject of objectivity ... I'm curious as to the necessity of nicknames such as "cold cash" being added into the person's given name as they were in this case. It gives the appearance of bias, IMO. ~~WendyMG~~
Not all cited links are properly cited via the {{cite}}
template, and others aren't even referenced via <ref>
. These should be updated, but it's tedious and takes a bit of time if only one person tries to do it. -
Matt
03:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
The insertion of (Democrat Louisiana) after every single occurrence of his name is clearly unnecessary. The motives of this decoration are pretty clear from the fact the person felt the need to insert it into the sentence 'Jefferson (Democrat Louisiana) is a Democratic Party member of Congress for Louisiana'.
Standard style is to refer to the full title of a person the first time their name appears in the article and thereafter use the principle name in the rest of the article. We do not mention that Tom DeLay is a former republican for texas at every point in his article. Moreover given the fact that Jefferson is about to be expelled from the Democratic Party, notwithstanding the idiots in the Black Caucus trying to defend him it is pretty pointless POV insertion. -- Gorgonzilla 22:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
To clarify a point seemingly under contention: only the full House ultimately has the authority to strip a committee member of his seat. The Democratic Caucus voted on Thursday, the full floor vote was taken on Friday. This should be clear from the provided sources, but in case anyone feels they are ambiguous, I found this in the Indianapolis Recorder [2]: "The entire 201-member caucus was set to vote on the issue June 15. If the Caucus passes the motion for the removal of Jefferson, the action will be taken to the floor for a full House vote."-- MikeJ9919 23:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
No mention of the Katrina aftermath scandal? Dubc0724 20:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Added it. Herr Lip 08:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph referring to Rep. Pelosi's speech on the radio conveys no significant information and is not connected to the subject of this article. Her speech makes no reference to Jefferson, or to any other individual. Listing topics that she did not refer to in the course of a 2 minute radio speech tells us nothing about what was included in the speech, and gives us no information on which to infer her motive in not including the topic. Matt605's comment on the History page reinserting the paragraph are clearly from his own POV: "don't exclude pertinent facts. ethics was said to be a Pelosi priority, but 24 hours later was not. that's balance and npov." But that ethics was not a Pelosi priority is not implied because she went 120 seconds in a scripted radio address without mentioning it, just as we cannot imply that Bush was unconcerned with ethics because he gave a similar address the same day and made no mention of ethical conduct either( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060617.html). If the paragraph had simply stated as a fact that Pelosi stopped caring about ethics in the course of 24 hours (which Matt605 intends the language to imply), and cited the radio address as proof, it would clearly be struck as POV. For these reasons, I've deleted this paragraph.
I've noticed one of the recent revisions involved changing Democratic to Democrat, and then back again. Is there a written Wikipedia policy concerning the prefered form of the party or does it just depend on the whim of the editor? Rockules318 17:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I recently read an article, and I'm wondering whether it should be referenced or not, I'll leave it to one of you guy's since you're probably more intelligent in the matter. Basically, according to a publically filed U.S. subpeona, FBI raids of the ERNC's (A São Tomé based oil company plagued with corruption charges) Houston offices, turned up with a folder labeled "William Jefferson". It's pretty interesting stuff, here's the link http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/02/business/oil.php?page=2 It's only a mention in the article, so if someone can find the actual subpeona online, I guess that would be favorable/awesome. -vince
Surely someone somewhere defends Jefferson, or likes the congressional work he's done; he keeps getting elected. I don't like the man, and think he should go to jail, but the article as it currently stands is unencyclopedic by failing to have any record of his congressional career, and thus violates NPOV. THF 12:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I edited out many redundant negative references, as well as material I thought less important, like nicknames. For example, I deleted a comment he could go to jail for life; the 16 indictments mentioned just before already make clear this is serious stuff. Also removed some vandalism. On reflection, I removed the "unbalanced" tag. It's much more balanced than it was, but I will not object if someone chooses to re-instate it. DaveBurstein ( talk) 05:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand how references work, so I can't debug this, but the end of the document shows up as template garbage. Unbalanced parens somewhere? 128.135.191.205 ( talk) 01:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
CAN SOMEONE UPDATE THE STATUS INTO THE INVESTIGATION ON THIS GUY BY THE FBI?? Alaska Senator Ted Stevens just got found guilty of the same thing and this Jefferson guy hasnt even gone to court and its been years since they caught him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.211 ( talk) 22:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
On Dec. 6, William J. Jefferson was defeated in the general election by Republican Anh "Joseph" Cao. The results of the general election need to be added to the biography to accurately reflect Jefferson will not be serving in the 111th Congress. DavidSteinle ( talk) 17:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
The nickname "Dollar Bill" is covered with context in the article, I believe it should be left out of the article summary. Hekerui ( talk) 01:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Other nicknames have included " Mr. Freeze", " Iceman", " Captain Cold", and " Fudgesicle". 12.41.204.3 ( talk) 16:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add information about Jefferson's voting record, stance on issues, committee assignements, ect. I know he was not one of the most liberal members, which was an issue that came up in 2006. Rockules318 ( talk) 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Need we say more? 12.41.204.3 ( talk) 19:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
I undid the unilateral page move of William J. Jefferson to William J. Jefferson (corruption investigation). Reasons: It was done without announcement or discussion, is not an obviously better title, left no article about William J. Jefferson, and broke numerous Wikimedia links. If there are proposals to rename this article, please discuss on talk page first, thanks. Infrogmation ( talk) 00:42, 10 October 2009 (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. |
Archive 1 |
I just wanted to bring light to the fact that this article claims that William Jefferson's district was the 3rd most democratic in the south but the Cao article says that it is the most democratic in the nation. The both use the number +D28. Both cannot be true. I also raised this question in the Cao article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Curtbash ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Problem resolved Curtbash ( talk) 08:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Looks like the guy got caught up in a Nigerian letter scam. Bringing broadband services to Nigeria? Mountains of cash stored in fridges? Weird. See [1]
I took out the comment about 'dollar bill', its a cheap insult that diminishes the following paragraph on the criminal investigation. This guy is going down, there is no need to make a cheap insult, facts and indictments speak much louder. -- Gorgonzilla 01:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
So, I put in an edit in which I said Bill was the first African American elected to a state office since Reconstruction. Which was how, as I recall, during his campaign we worked on things. Not to dismiss Sidney Bartholemew, but he's Creole, which in New Orleans and Louisiana politics is an entirely different thing. Also, in my edit, I mentioned that Bill was a Republican, which was also edited out. So ... discuss? Tall Girl 07:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Tall Girl 07:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Tall Girl 23:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually the fact that a pol calls a press conference to announce that they are not going to resign is pretty much the most significant thing they can do career wise short of actually resigning.
It is usually followed by another press conference...-- Gorgonzilla 20:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
The text of the speech is available on TPM http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000656.php. Even though this is a partisan source it is partisan left and Jefferson is a Democrat. -- Gorgonzilla 22:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the following from the "External links" section because it's not linked to anything external to Wikipedia (and even then, only the date).
Perhaps whoever added it meant it to be a "Reference"? If so, add it back in an appropriate section. - dcljr ( talk) 01:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Why did we just eliminate all the information about the current investigation? Chadlupkes 19:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
That was User:Nolagrl with a total of three edits, using all three to delete negative data and add "positive" (pity poor me type) unsourced data. WAS 4.250 22:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Why was {{Project Congress}} deleted? It's being added to all the folks who have served in Congress. -- Sholom 03:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Please, nothing is so urgent that you can't wait more than a day. As someone else said, this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. We have to get it right, not get it first. Let's all try to slow things down a bit.
The off-line source is definitely authentic; I looked it up via microfilm at the library I work at and read it myself. It's a biographical profile of Jefferson written by the Times Picayune - the New Orleans daily newspaper - during his campaign for mayor in 1986. Aside from campaign material put out by Jefferson himself (which likely to be biased), it's the best source for his early life that I've been able to find. -- Praxedis G 11:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm not pro-Republican, although I've been balancing the anti- Dennis Hastert reports with the DOJ denials. And I'm not pro-Democratic, although I changed "caught ... taking a bribe" to "filmed ... receiving" the money.
I just think we should avoid taking sides. Let the facts speak for themselves.
The FBI says they have Jefferson on film taking money. Fine, maybe that will be evidence in a case, or maybe he'll cop a plea. We are in no hurry, we do not need to prejudge him. Any more than we have to prejudge Hastert. Take it easy, slow down, and be accurate. Only newspapers have to "get it first". We are an encyclopedia, we have to "get it right". -- Uncle Ed 20:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm new here, but on the subject of objectivity ... I'm curious as to the necessity of nicknames such as "cold cash" being added into the person's given name as they were in this case. It gives the appearance of bias, IMO. ~~WendyMG~~
Not all cited links are properly cited via the {{cite}}
template, and others aren't even referenced via <ref>
. These should be updated, but it's tedious and takes a bit of time if only one person tries to do it. -
Matt
03:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
The insertion of (Democrat Louisiana) after every single occurrence of his name is clearly unnecessary. The motives of this decoration are pretty clear from the fact the person felt the need to insert it into the sentence 'Jefferson (Democrat Louisiana) is a Democratic Party member of Congress for Louisiana'.
Standard style is to refer to the full title of a person the first time their name appears in the article and thereafter use the principle name in the rest of the article. We do not mention that Tom DeLay is a former republican for texas at every point in his article. Moreover given the fact that Jefferson is about to be expelled from the Democratic Party, notwithstanding the idiots in the Black Caucus trying to defend him it is pretty pointless POV insertion. -- Gorgonzilla 22:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
To clarify a point seemingly under contention: only the full House ultimately has the authority to strip a committee member of his seat. The Democratic Caucus voted on Thursday, the full floor vote was taken on Friday. This should be clear from the provided sources, but in case anyone feels they are ambiguous, I found this in the Indianapolis Recorder [2]: "The entire 201-member caucus was set to vote on the issue June 15. If the Caucus passes the motion for the removal of Jefferson, the action will be taken to the floor for a full House vote."-- MikeJ9919 23:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
No mention of the Katrina aftermath scandal? Dubc0724 20:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Added it. Herr Lip 08:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph referring to Rep. Pelosi's speech on the radio conveys no significant information and is not connected to the subject of this article. Her speech makes no reference to Jefferson, or to any other individual. Listing topics that she did not refer to in the course of a 2 minute radio speech tells us nothing about what was included in the speech, and gives us no information on which to infer her motive in not including the topic. Matt605's comment on the History page reinserting the paragraph are clearly from his own POV: "don't exclude pertinent facts. ethics was said to be a Pelosi priority, but 24 hours later was not. that's balance and npov." But that ethics was not a Pelosi priority is not implied because she went 120 seconds in a scripted radio address without mentioning it, just as we cannot imply that Bush was unconcerned with ethics because he gave a similar address the same day and made no mention of ethical conduct either( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060617.html). If the paragraph had simply stated as a fact that Pelosi stopped caring about ethics in the course of 24 hours (which Matt605 intends the language to imply), and cited the radio address as proof, it would clearly be struck as POV. For these reasons, I've deleted this paragraph.
I've noticed one of the recent revisions involved changing Democratic to Democrat, and then back again. Is there a written Wikipedia policy concerning the prefered form of the party or does it just depend on the whim of the editor? Rockules318 17:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I recently read an article, and I'm wondering whether it should be referenced or not, I'll leave it to one of you guy's since you're probably more intelligent in the matter. Basically, according to a publically filed U.S. subpeona, FBI raids of the ERNC's (A São Tomé based oil company plagued with corruption charges) Houston offices, turned up with a folder labeled "William Jefferson". It's pretty interesting stuff, here's the link http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/02/business/oil.php?page=2 It's only a mention in the article, so if someone can find the actual subpeona online, I guess that would be favorable/awesome. -vince
Surely someone somewhere defends Jefferson, or likes the congressional work he's done; he keeps getting elected. I don't like the man, and think he should go to jail, but the article as it currently stands is unencyclopedic by failing to have any record of his congressional career, and thus violates NPOV. THF 12:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I edited out many redundant negative references, as well as material I thought less important, like nicknames. For example, I deleted a comment he could go to jail for life; the 16 indictments mentioned just before already make clear this is serious stuff. Also removed some vandalism. On reflection, I removed the "unbalanced" tag. It's much more balanced than it was, but I will not object if someone chooses to re-instate it. DaveBurstein ( talk) 05:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand how references work, so I can't debug this, but the end of the document shows up as template garbage. Unbalanced parens somewhere? 128.135.191.205 ( talk) 01:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
CAN SOMEONE UPDATE THE STATUS INTO THE INVESTIGATION ON THIS GUY BY THE FBI?? Alaska Senator Ted Stevens just got found guilty of the same thing and this Jefferson guy hasnt even gone to court and its been years since they caught him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.211 ( talk) 22:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
On Dec. 6, William J. Jefferson was defeated in the general election by Republican Anh "Joseph" Cao. The results of the general election need to be added to the biography to accurately reflect Jefferson will not be serving in the 111th Congress. DavidSteinle ( talk) 17:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
The nickname "Dollar Bill" is covered with context in the article, I believe it should be left out of the article summary. Hekerui ( talk) 01:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Other nicknames have included " Mr. Freeze", " Iceman", " Captain Cold", and " Fudgesicle". 12.41.204.3 ( talk) 16:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add information about Jefferson's voting record, stance on issues, committee assignements, ect. I know he was not one of the most liberal members, which was an issue that came up in 2006. Rockules318 ( talk) 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Need we say more? 12.41.204.3 ( talk) 19:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
I undid the unilateral page move of William J. Jefferson to William J. Jefferson (corruption investigation). Reasons: It was done without announcement or discussion, is not an obviously better title, left no article about William J. Jefferson, and broke numerous Wikimedia links. If there are proposals to rename this article, please discuss on talk page first, thanks. Infrogmation ( talk) 00:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)