Talk:Massachusetts's 5th congressional district special election, 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Massachusetts's 5th congressional district special election, 2007 is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
The options are: "FA", "A", "GA", "B", "Start", "Stub", "List", "Disambiguation", "Template", or "Category."
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
The options are: "Top", "High", "Mid", and "Low."
event This article is about one (or many) event(s).

Contents

[edit] Error?

Wikipedia's entry on a Kevin Thompson (pastor) wouldn't seem to be the guy running and yet, that would be what this special election article would imply. 24.16.121.195 00:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't belive Kevin Thompson has his own page I think who ever put his name in just added the [[ because all the other names are linked as well. Gang14 17:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Then shouldn't someone kill the link? 24.16.121.195 04:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ways to list things

I want opinions because apparentl y what i did was not liked and i dont like what was done after mine so please discuss Gang14 04:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Gang14--who are you and why are you changing a candidate's correct information? The change of Patrick Murphy from bricklayer to Mason is clearly intentional. Patrick is not a Free Mason; he is a bricklayer and stone mason and the distinction is important. The edits you made earlier clearly show an attempt to obscure his candidacy in a shroud of Green Party candidates and Working Family candidates who do not exist and are not running. I have not made any attempts to change the description and biographical information connected to any other candidate. If you support transparency and respect the democracy of such a forum, you will not be a filter through which only partial truths can be told and molded. You also omitted Patrick's place of residence, Lowell and the high school of his graduation, Phillips Academy, at which he received a four-year scholarship. All of these omissions seem to support the idea that you have some sort of fear of his candidacy. I will grant you, that if you are indeed supporting another candidate, your insecurities are indeed grounded--this will become clear as the campaign progresses. For transparency, I submit to you that I support Murphy's candidacy for this election, but I also believe in ensuring that each candidate and their posts are treated respectfully and without bias. Beyond this post, I will not engage with you any further to thwart your attempts to pervert the truth and the layout of this page. Though I feel like a parent scolding a child, yours has been a childish endeavor in which I will not participate. I request that you do not further amend Patrick Murphy's links. I also suggest that you post your name, so that there is no mask under which these edits are being made. You ought to also include, as I did with my changes, supportable, valid reasons for your own editing. I am certainly satisfied with the logic of my own changes, and that there was no impropriety or misrepresentation in the edits I made. I will also not shrink into the obscurity of the internet; that is not my style. I suggest you follow my lead.
  • Dan Murphy
  • First I was wrong with my changing of Mr. Murphy's occupation I did not know of a difference between the two. Second I was just adding those other parties in to see what other thought. ThirdI understand leaving in his residence but him graduating from Phillips is unimportant on this page however if you would like to create his page then please go ahead I have already stated it for you all you have to do is add more information. Finally you signed your name incorrectly all you have to do is add 4 "~" of these after you are done typing. Gang14 17:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Correction to my last statement the link you provided for his occupation as bricklayer says bricklayer or mason in the first sentance. Also in the article from the lowell sun the title is Lowell Mason runnning. So I was not wrong u were for assuming I meant free mason. second whats so wrong about being a free mason. Gang14 17:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • We all must understand that articles about current elections run the risk of violating WP rules (see WP:NOT). That is why these articles must be excessively neutral. While the official recognition of a political party may be technically correct in some instances, it is not necessary here. We should just list candidates in the best NPOV possible. Therefore, I have put them all in alphabetical order first by party name, then by name. Let me add this: elections are not to be fought on wikipedia. Besides, no candidate could possibly win or lose based on anything posted here.—Markles 19:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Murphy

I was rereading the article from the lowell sun that talks about Patrick Murphy entering the race and it came to my attention that Patrick's fathers name is Dan so Mr. Murphy do you mind explaining yourself Gang14 17:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

  • See my comment above.—Markles 19:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historic document

Wikipedia is intended to be a historic encyclopedia, not a website primarily for news, current events, nor a campaign ticker. That's why I think we should keep candidates in the article who either: a) choose not to run; b) drop out; or c) lose. They should be kept on the same footing as other candidates with a perenthetical note. They should be alphabetical by party then by name.

For example:
==Candidates==
===Democrats===
* [[Terry Dropout]] (D)(Withdrew) - Mayor of [[Townsville]], endorsed Chris Winner.
* [[Chris Winner]] (D) - Professor of Ergonomics
===Republicans===
* [[M. Bobby Also-ran]] (R) - Shopping cart vendor
* [[Pat Ambivalent]] (R)(Not declared) - Spouse of the late Senator Ambivalent
—Markles 00:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed and after the primary placing those who lost into a seperate heading Gang14 02:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
No other article on an election have I seen withdrawn candidates or candidates that decided not to run displayed under the same heading. I do think that they should be included in the article, but not under "candidates" because they won't appear on the ballot. I don't see why a seperate heading (which is standard in all other articles i've seen) would be a problem. --Tdl1060 21:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
  • That's a good point about them not being on the ballot. After all, if we're looking for some official definitive list, that's the best. OK. I'm sold. Move the non-candidates to a separate heading. After all, they're not candidates.—Markles 22:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Default sort

Why did you put a {{DEFAULTSORT:}} which equals the Pagename? That seems redundant.—Markles 23:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controversies?

Should we add a section? Emily's list is the one thing I'd mention in it as well. Any opinions?

  • I'd add a prose section instead which can include any details of the race including all notable endorsements, debates, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Comedy240 (talk • contribs) 00:07:20, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
Any other opinons? Gang14 04:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)