Talk:Ernie Chambers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ernie Chambers article.

Article policies
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Omaha may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Veracity

I can't trust this article's veracity because, at the moment, it talks about something believable (that someone filed suit against god), but then talks about something wholly unbelievable (that a document "appeared" where god responded to the allegations). I see the CNN article, and I *still* don't believe it. PragmaticallyWyrd 07:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The way media paints Chambers is generally as a "maverick", and I think that's the point of his lawsuit is to demonstrate the inanity of such lawsuits. That response, where the document "appears", only shows that someone else doesn't get the point Chambers is trying to make. Anyhow, its all cited with reliable sources, so the truthfulness is evident. – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 13:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the suggestion is made that god actually did this. The liberal use of quotation marks in both the cited article and this article make this clear. As Freechild mentions these responses illustrate how the point Chambers is trying to make has been missed, not that god is really trying to file a response. However, I will say this point could be made more clear. If you don't want to do this, I will try and think about it on this weekend.Wolfrock 15:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original conversation from article start date

The sixth paragraph does not seem to have a NPOV in its discussion of Chambers' opinions on race issues. It would be nice to have some citations for the examples that are given.

~

This article needs to be Wikified. The author's personal viewpoints about Ernie Chambers' views on race should not be featured so prominently

It does appear that someone does want to add their opinions on Chambers in this entry. I reverted it again, but, to 68.13.152.116, if you insist that your contribution has a neutral point of view, feel free to explain how this is the case on this discussion board. --Benfergy 20:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The first sentence of the third paragraph amounts to nothing more than opinion. Unless a citation from "many an attorney or fellow legislator" can be given, it should be stricken from the article.

I disagree with the statement above that says the article focuses on race too much. Um...HELLO? Have you ever heard Chambers speak? The man is obsessed with race to the point of paranoia.

Not that we should be talking about Chambers himself rather than the article, but... he is the only African American in the Nebraska Legislature, and only the second African American ever to serve in that body - with the previous Senator serving in 1892. Chambers "obsession" could be shown to be duly justified. • Freechild'sup? 18:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent citation note

Hey all,

I added a citation request to this article's claim that Chambers is a "Democrat." I must watch his weekly public-access television show a majority of the time, and he often mentions the fact that he has never garnered (at least in so much as financial) support from *any* political party, in which he often seems almost bitter, but proud. As far as I know he is an independent, but if his party registry illicits otherwise, I'd like to know. I would think such a label would be offensive to Chambers and even the DNC, unless true.

Added verification template. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Patrio-fascist (talkcontribs) 23:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Attn: Editor of this article

To let it be known,

Chambers has a wikipediac vanguard in me. Please note: I will be watching this article like a hawk. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Patrio-fascist (talkcontribs) 00:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Party affiliation

I just saw a disturbing event on this article. The first line described him as a Republican this afternoon, and then - after some discussion on Orfay, it now lists him as a Democrat.

I searched his name on Google and found his state legislature web site, which lists no party affiliation. The fact that he ran for US Senate as a New Alliance Party member makes me doubt he is a Republican.

Can someone please either remove the epithet or verify it with outside citations?


Jay Duff Chicago, IL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.78.106.187 (talk) 01:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lawsuit...

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Nebraska_Senator_sues_God

Some information should be added to the article about this weird incident. Contralya 13:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Various Edits

The way that quotes and phrases have been taken from articles has been in a fashion biased against Sen. Chambers, particularly in the 2006 Omaha schools section. I did my best to better clarify that section and give proper context with selections from the cited articles. I also added a little bit to the section about the lawsuit against God to better clarify that situation as well.

I moved some random statements around into more appropriate sections of the page and made some minor grammatical edits in other places. I also changed all references referring to him as "Chambers" to "Sen. Chambers". The fact he was not even being referred to as Mr. Chambers is in very poor taste.

SouthStExit 07:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It was my choice to refer to the subject of the article as "Chambers" rather than anything else. WP is an encyclopedia, and should avoid the familiarity of everyday speech, such as using "mister" as an honorific. I will leave "senator" out of respect for his position - but, if you feel passionately about labeling elected officials by their position and honorifics, I would suggest that you have a long road to travel on WP, where politicians are simply subjects of articles. I do appreciate the rest of your edits though, and hope that you will attend to more articles on WP. – Freechild (¡!¡!¡!¡) 14:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I have made additional minor edits to the page, mostly grammatical edits and moving some sentences to more appropriate positions in the article. I also added some clarification to the Legislative section pertaining to NCAA student athletes and included a source.

SouthStExit 03:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)