Jump to content

Talk:Ward Connerly: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 29: Line 29:


:In general, I would still argue that "moderate conservative" is unclear, and it borders on what Wikipedia defines as weasel words. If you mean that he is a libertarian conservative, which might be the case if his opposition to affirmative action and his support for domestic partnerships reflect a desire to limit government's role in regulating people's lives, then say so. If you mean that he is conservative on some issues but not others, then enumerate them (and I'd use more than just affirmative action and domestic partnerships). And if he's mainly just focused on affirmative action, then perhaps call him an anti-affirmative action activist. But please be more clear.
:In general, I would still argue that "moderate conservative" is unclear, and it borders on what Wikipedia defines as weasel words. If you mean that he is a libertarian conservative, which might be the case if his opposition to affirmative action and his support for domestic partnerships reflect a desire to limit government's role in regulating people's lives, then say so. If you mean that he is conservative on some issues but not others, then enumerate them (and I'd use more than just affirmative action and domestic partnerships). And if he's mainly just focused on affirmative action, then perhaps call him an anti-affirmative action activist. But please be more clear.

==Spearheaded?==
The "Political Views" section says that Connerly "spearheaded efforts to grant domestic partner benefits to gay and lesbian couples in all state universities." Is there a source for this? If he was a leader in this campaign, are there any articles fromt he LGBT press, if not from the mainstream media, describing his leadership? If not, I'd strongly suggest that it be removed, or at least that "spearheaded" be changed to something like "supported." This whole paragraph is problematic due to its lack of sources, even though it describes what Connerly "says."

Revision as of 07:51, 22 November 2006

WikiProject iconCalifornia Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconBiography Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

The "uncle tom" remark is a rude comment and is presented too matter-of-factly —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.195.129.10 (talkcontribs) 14:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Also, the "downplaying African heritage" remarks appear to be a specific editor's bias toward the one-drop rule. I've known Connerly for years. He does not downplay his African heritage, he simply embraces ALL of his heritage. There is a big difference between the two concepts. Let's not be promoting the racist one-drop rule here. It is not appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jlandrith (talkcontribs) 23:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

The article doesn't respect the NPOV policy

Biographies of living persons must adhere strictly to the following policies:

The current article, is written in a clearly biased tone, and doesn't provide any reliable and neutral source to back up some claims. I partly edited the text, but due to lack of time, I didn't finish it. I'll try to edit the rest of the article later. Any suggestion or remark, please write it here. Thx --vincent shooter 15:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks both informative and fair to my eye. Indeed, I can't guess which bias you think it has! The attempt to suggest that Mr. Connerly might personally support segregation would be put in better context by mentioning that his wife is a Euro-American. --JediGeek 16:40, 17 November 2006 (Houston Time)
Euro-American?? Now, that sounds racist and non-NPOV. I think the article as it now stands is fairly neutral. I'd remove words such as "purports" and "controversial" in the first paragraph: That sounds like it was written by someone with an axe to grind. —QuicksilverT @ 16:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moderate Conservative Political Activist

The first sentence uses this term to describe Connerly--what does it even mean? In addition to be unclear, it strikes me as an attempt to change perceptions of the fact that Connerly is indeed conservative. Here in Michigan, he just helped pass a constitutional amendment opposed by both the Democratic and Republican candidates for governor. That sounds pretty conservative for me. It's not a value judgement, just a statement of fact. I'd suggest removing the "moderate." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.88.100.58 (talkcontribs) 16:23, 21 November 2006.

I disagree. Since when has support or opposition to affirmative action been the sole defining factor in determining whether one is a conservative or not? Connerly has many moderate views, such as his support for homosexual rights, which clearly runs counter to modern conservatism. Jlandrith (talkcontribs) 16:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

When you refer to "modern conservatism," what strain of conservatism do you mean? Religious conservatism, or free-market conservatism? Or foreign policy neoconservativism? many would argue that there is no unified modern conservatism, and fights following the '06 election seem to reflect that.
The entry says that he supports domestic partner benefits; I agree that that is not a conservative view, but generally, domestic partner benefits refer to something more limited than civil unions, which are in turn more limited than same-sex marriage. So while it's important to note that he is not anti-gay, his position there is relatively conservative if compared to the law of the land in various other states. I'm curious, though--what kinds of domestic partnerships has he supported? The meaning of the term has changed significantly in California since it was enacted in 2000. See the Wikipedia article on "Domestic Partnership in California" for more on this.
In general, I would still argue that "moderate conservative" is unclear, and it borders on what Wikipedia defines as weasel words. If you mean that he is a libertarian conservative, which might be the case if his opposition to affirmative action and his support for domestic partnerships reflect a desire to limit government's role in regulating people's lives, then say so. If you mean that he is conservative on some issues but not others, then enumerate them (and I'd use more than just affirmative action and domestic partnerships). And if he's mainly just focused on affirmative action, then perhaps call him an anti-affirmative action activist. But please be more clear.

Spearheaded?

The "Political Views" section says that Connerly "spearheaded efforts to grant domestic partner benefits to gay and lesbian couples in all state universities." Is there a source for this? If he was a leader in this campaign, are there any articles fromt he LGBT press, if not from the mainstream media, describing his leadership? If not, I'd strongly suggest that it be removed, or at least that "spearheaded" be changed to something like "supported." This whole paragraph is problematic due to its lack of sources, even though it describes what Connerly "says."