Talk:Bill Frenzel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within Minnesota articles.
This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Bill Frenzel is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress. You can help by editing this article. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject U.S. Congress articles.

(I moved this rude and POV clip from my talk page to this page, where it belongs)

[edit] About the Bill Frenzel page

Instead of reverting my text, how about you edit it? The facts of that whole thing about the Prevention of Genocide act are all on record, so you're best off just editing it.

You obviously didn't like the word "atrocity" ... perhaps you have some other term for it.

Bill Frenzel DID oppose the PoG act, and business with Saddam Hussein DID increase between the US and Iraq after he gassed the Kurds. These are facts, and you're going to have to get used to the idea that they are going onto the Bill Frenzel page, one way or another.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/kurds/battle.html

I could have quoted other comments about Bill Frenzel's comments, saying about basically how Bill Frenzel chose economics over ethics.

Let me say again... facts are facts, and if this cannot be resolved civilly, there are methods of binding arbitration.

For the life of me, I have no idea why this page is of such concern to you. Did you do business with Iraq or Bill Frenzel at one time or something?

I await your response.

SanjaySingh

"atrocity" and "it is a matter of record that" are POV. I am simply going for neutral wording. Your rants at me are your own, you cannot attribute to me any motives. Leave the facts as they are, and read a little about Wikipedia style. Your talk page shows that someone has already tried to school you about WP:NPOV. Chris 23:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV, the last refuge

Well, I popped over to your page, to get a better sense of who you are. I think I understand you. You seem to be one of those blindly patriotic stereotypical Americans who spout lots of rhetoric about:

==

"I believe Americans should examine fights before we pick them, and I think the present success of the countries we fought and 'won' are the best measures of their own strengths of national character."

AND

" I believe that removing _any_ valid word from the language in the purported interest of Neutral Point of View is the worst form of bias and is in reality thought control. The reasons words like 'dictator', 'never', 'rarely' are in the language is because there was a need for them."

AND

"I am a really good listener, and I am big enough to concede valid points well-made. My biggest hatred (yes, I can say that, see point 5) is reserved for those who cannot do likewise. I have seen several of my articles tanked by tiny minds who could not understand what the purpose of the article was and ruined it with their own agenda."

==

These 3 claims of yours are relevant to settling this Bill Frenzel thing. I want to make it clear that his actions are a matter of public record, and that is non-negotiable. He is most directly responsible for no action being taken for the Anfal campaign, and some extra information about it. I don't feel that leaving only the quote is enough to create the proper context of what he did. Thousands of people DID die, and the inference is there that Bill Frenzel cannot see the value of sanctions as a means to motivate political change in a non-violent way. Thats his legacy.

You seem to want to sanitize an unflattering aspect of one of your favorite politicians.

Furthermore, I have read your discussion page, and while I have been accused of NPOV before regarding an abstract Tolkien concept, I am well qualified to discuss it. I have taken the liberty of reading your discussion page, and you're hardly conflict-free.

One thing we do have in common, we take our writing seriously and as a source of pride.

So think about it, and lets see if we can resolve this. I don't want us to become adversaries, because despite this disagreement you seem to be a dedicated writer. But I cannot in good conscience let this matter be settled solely on your terms, which is to somehow mask the naked economic self-interest of what Bill Frenzel did.

Get back to me when you have a chance.

SanjaySingh

I am not saying the actions did not happen, and if you can find a nonPOV way of stating them, by all means put them on the article. But I said earlier and I maintain that you used polarized and loaded words. If you say "Bob Smith massacred a village,", that is a statement of fact. If you say "Bob Smith horribly massacred innocent villagers", you have made the sentence POV. We're building an encyclopedia, not a blog. If you can put the facts in without coloring them one direction or another, I am amenable to that. Chris 23:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)