Talk:Louise McIntosh Slaughter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Louise McIntosh Slaughter is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Template Usage] [Watch Project Articles] [Project Talk] | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's importance scale. | |
 |
Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
Louise McIntosh Slaughter 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. |
this page is hilarious. she sounds like the perfect human being. wikipedia as free campaign advertising, i couldn't think of anything more advantageous gmrepoli 06:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Added POV template. I agree with Gmrepoli that this article needs to be rescued from Ms. Slaughter's political supporters and the first step would be to further reduce what an earlier editor called "fawning and gushing". That means, among other things, eliminating many unnecessary adjectives that hype but do not inform. For example: prestigious Rules Committee, true-life coal miner’s daughter (and drop the movie link unless the movie is about Louise Slaughter), worked hard as a coal miner (or show me a coal miner who doesn't work hard), etc. I see too much awkward phraseology, such as "Armed with an increased passion". One may be motivated by an increased passion, but armed? And what about this mixed metaphor: "Throwing her hat in the public arena for the second time, she knew the deck was stacked against her"? Did she write or issue a report? No, she unveild it. She's a tireless promoter; she's deeply concerned, and a leading advocate who won historic increases. The hype is the first part of the problem. Second, where is the account of what her detractors and opponents have to say about her? Or is she the only politician in in the world who is universally loved and admired? I will try to implement some of my suggested changes when I have more time. Blanchette 18:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
If you are to edit this page, maybe you should consider editing all of the politicians as most articles are not without a slant. Unless a full assessment of all members of congress will be performed, a bias is inevitable...therefore unless something is "untrue" I would leave it as is.
- Actually, all articles on Wikipedia are being considered for editing. They're all slanted in some way too. We're not singling out this article, we just have to start fixing somewhere.
She sounds so good here because this is word-for-word from her "detailed campaign biography." Isn't that a copy-vio issue? Nonetheless, I think a re-working of the bio would suffice to make it "neutral" and acceptable. - Nhprman List 03:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
There's a slight problem with contradictory sources here. According to the NYS Board of elections, Wojtaszek received 59,547 votes in the 2002 election against Slaughter [1]. However, according to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, he only received 58,547 [2]. Which source should we trust here? Zzedar 20:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
