Talk:Paul Hackett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Paul Hackett article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Ohio Portal Paul Hackett is part of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.

	Paul Hackett is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 8, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 17, 2005 Peer review Reviewed November 15, 2005 Articles for deletion Kept May 13, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if 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]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
	This article is supported by the Military work group.

An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

Contents 1 Hackett's ad with Bush 2 Netroots 3 Organization category 4 Edit 5 Good article 6 Image of Jean Schmidt 7 Talk radio 8 Rank? 9 The "Unterfuhrer" Controversy 10 GA Re-Review and In-line citations 11 Good Article Review has been initiated 12 Delisted per Good Article Review consensus

[edit] Hackett's ad with Bush

Hackett is running an ad making it look like he and President Bush are buddy buddy. Here is the real truth.

What Paul Hackett Thinks Of Bush: “Hackett told USA Today that Bush’s taunting line, “Bring ‘em on!” was “the most incredibly stupid comment I’ve ever heard a president of the United States make.” He also told the newspaper that, while he was willing to put his life on the line for the president, “I’ve said that I don’t like the son-of-a-[expletive] that lives in the White House.” The full article can be read here http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/30/AR2005073001092.html

[edit] Netroots

It might be good to include something about Netroots in the article. CNN has a good article about it, and google has a lot of information as well. Netroot article with Hackett. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 15:59, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Organization category

Isn't it odd to put an individual in a category called "veterans organizations"? User:PedanticallySpeaking.

[edit] Edit

Previous version of this article was insanely long... nearly as long as the page for Albert Einstein. For a person of fairly low notability, there was just too much padding and extraneous unecessary info (the places where his father worked for instance... uncessary information). I summarized things a bit. Article is still long, but touches on key points that are important and/or of interest to the general public.

On that note, why is evryone on Wikipedia obsessed with what the Colbert Report has to say? I think what he said on CR wasn't nearly as interesting as his interviews with Ed Shultz. I don't mean to rant, but c'mon--there's so much of this crap floating around. 72.24.182.238 21:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Menk

[edit] Good article

I'm delighted to see this tagged as a "good article" as I wrote and researched most of it. If someone would like to nominate it as a FAC, you can count on at least one support vote. PedanticallySpeaking 17:06, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's problematic to feature an article about a candidate in an ongoing race. It looks like favoritism unless Sherrod Brown and Mike DeWine could be brought up to FA status at the same time. JamesMLane 18:20, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. In many races, including Hackett's bid for Congress, there were several lesser known candidates running. It would be difficult to compile FA on all candidates. If one article is good, the fact other articles need improvement should be no bar to it being FA.

[edit] Image of Jean Schmidt

Please note that I have reduced Jean Schmidt's image on this page - primarily because the article is on Paul Hackett, not Schmidt. Stude62 14:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk radio

I added a reference to Hackett's appearance on Air America. Future career choice? Who knows. --Starkruzr 09:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rank?

What was his rank? Tempshill 03:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hackett saw active duty in the United States Marine Corps from 1989 to 1992, and then joined the Select Marine Corps Reserve. In 2004, he volunteered for active duty in the Iraq War, spending seven months as a civil affairs officer with the 4th Civil Affairs Group of the 1st Marine Division. He was assigned to Ramadi and supported the Fallujah campaign and reconstruction efforts there. On 21 October 2004, a convoy under his command was hit by two roadside bombs, but Hackett was uninjured. He returned to Ohio in early 2005.

89 to 92? In the Marine Corps? LCpl - Sgt if he was enlisted (probably Cpl), probably 1Lt - Cpt if he was an officer. I dunno if "civil affairs officer" is a billet or an actual officer thingy. --Johnny (Cuervo) 00:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The "Unterfuhrer" Controversy

I noticed an addition to the article citing this episode was removed, with the rationale that it was a non-controversy noticed by "some blogger". I submit that the fact that Hackett addressed his comments the next day on Mark Levin's radio show suggests that this is more than that. How much more is debatable, but sufficient that it can be noted in the article. I have modified the article accordingly. 207.47.232.64 20:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, so where is the quote from the Mark Levin show? --Asbl 23:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The quote is at the provided link [1](which contains a full audio clip of the segment). I've paraphrased from it in the (restored due to blanking) paragraph on the issue. Feel free to revise the passage further (but don't blank) if this is still not "balanced" enough, or discuss it here. Hiddekel 01:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 23:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Review has been initiated

a Good Article Review has been initiated to delist this article from the GA lists since there are no inline citations. The above notice has been in place for months, and NO action has been taken to improve this article. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted per Good Article Review consensus

This article has been delisted as a Good Article per this archived discussion at Good Article Review. The main concern of the delisting discussion was the lack of inline citations to support specific factual claims made by the article. If fixes can be made to bring it up to the standards at the Good Article criteria page please do so, and then renominate the article at WP:GAC. Good luck and happy editing. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)