User talk:Davecampbell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Davecampbell, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Chooserr

Hi, My Name is David Campbell

Member of the Peace and Freedom Party and lots more. Still getting my feet wet here at Wikipedia. Be gentle!

I don't know if you saw my response on my talk page. I don't know much about the P&FP. Maybe you could add the missing presidential and gubernatorial candidates to the party's page? Schizombie 11:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

1 Peace & Freedom Party: Peltier
2 Ricardo Romo
3 NORML
4 WP meetup

[edit] Peace & Freedom Party: Peltier

"(It should be noted that Peltier's conviction is disputed by Peltier, by the Peace and Freedom Party, and by many distinguished observers, as noted on Peltier's page. As such, referring to him as a "convicted murderer" appears POV - just as the designation "political prisoner" would be. The latter, at least, would more accurately reflect the Party's, and many others', characterization of Peltier.)" This isn't exactly encyclopedic style. The first sentence isn't bad, but "referring to him as a 'convicted murderer' appears POV" is more the sort of complaint you would raise on the talk page. Schizombie 02:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that would be the sort of thing one would raise on a talk page. And I have no intention of getting involved in an "edit war." But just saying "convicted murderer" and then deleting the note that his conviction is disputed (and no, they aren't all) is the sort of thing that will provoke such. Let's find a better way. --Davecampbell 03:02, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I certainly agree it wasn't right to just have the fact that he's a convicted murderer be in there without further comment on that. At the same time, it seems fair that the note that he is a convicted murderer was added - it is unusual that a party with "peace" in its name would have such a candidate (and not many presidential candidates are behind bars). Since that is unusual at first look, noting the party disputes his conviction, or the party views him as a political prisoner would seem fair to include in the article. If you have a citation where the party addresses that, even better. Schizombie 03:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I went back, deleted the new paragraph, and added "/political prisoner" after "convicted murderer". I did this after I saw that there is a page for Political Prisoners, and that Leonard Peltier is listed. The information on Peltier's page and external links there will be more useful to the curious than anything I could type in there. While it may be unusual for a party with "peace" in its name to put forth a candidate convicted (wrongly) of murder (isn't a party with "peace" in its name unusual in the first place?), such should not be surprising from a party with "freedom" in its name.

I don't know if you think I'm giving you a hard time? I was just trying to put myself in the head of someone who'd never heard of the party or Peltier before, reading the information only on that page. Also, did you see my comment above? There are some candidates I wasn't able to fill in, if you know who they are? Or other info, like maybe more info about its founding? Schizombie 03:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Big problem with this medium is, it's hard to tell if someone's trying to give you a hard time, or for that matter, if you're giving someone else a hard time without necessarily meaning to. As far as I was concerned, having the Peltier link was sufficient, as anyone with an interest need merely click and get a much more complete story than either "convicted murderer" or "political prisoner" could convey. In the head of someone who'd never heard of Peltier, simply describing him as a "convicted murderer" conveys a picture of him diametrically opposite the one we hold - and that's a big part of why we nominated him for President. Not because we thought a lot of people would necessarily vote for him, but because we (1) felt no one else running was worth endorsing, and (2) figured the best thing we could do with our Presidential ballot slot, was to shine a light on this fellow, who we consider a political prisoner, and who is suffering terribly in prison. (Actually, I can't really testify as to what the discussion was at the convention - I was in hospital at the time, having been intercepted on my motorcycle ride towards the con by a deer - ouch!) Let's agree not to give each other a hard time, ;-) and that our common goal here is to increase the sum total of knowledge readily available to all humans, everywhere. --Davecampbell 07:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

On the second point, I've been trying to recruit a comrade or two to check out the article and fill in some missing pieces. I know at least two who know of Wikipedia. Perhaps after the current pressure of campaign filing deadlines is over, someone with more knowledge than I will have the time and inclination to do so. --Davecampbell 08:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ricardo Romo

Is the Ricardo Roma the party ran for Governor in 1970 the same as the University of Texas President? Esquizombi 13:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

My sources say "Our candidate was Ricardo Romo, not Ricardo Roma." --Davecampbell 19:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a typo on my part. The UT President is Ricardo Romo. I'm guessing not the same person as the P&FP RR. Esquizombi 19:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)