Talk:Charlie Crist/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Charlie Crist. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
ABF
On 25 Aug, Keeper76 wrote the edit summary, ". . . Overwhelming consensus here is that the tag is legitimate, the project wants to include this article, like any other project, and to assert otherwise is fallacious and ABF". I call upon Wikipedians to refrain from a culture of cliquishness which is big at WP. One way to do so it to use in group acronyms and abbreviations like "ABF" only sparingly, and to err on the side of full phrases. Hurmata (talk) 23:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- "ABF"=Assume Bad Faith, or in other words, to believe that edits with which one disagrees are made with nefarious intentions. There is an essay on the topic. Wikipedia guidelines are to assume good faith unless there is a reason to believe otherwise. I don't think that either side is acting in bad faith over the back-and-forth over the template's addition, although I am beginning to develop whiplash from watching it on-off-on-off-on-off... Horologium (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
- Apologies for the use of the acronym, Hurmata. I was out of room on the edit summary window, which should have been an indicator that I was saying too much, not an indicator that I should start abbreviating. I should've just left the last 7 words +1 acronym out of there, I regret them. Keeper ǀ 76 15:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Becksguy decided this topic was a subheading of another, so he reoutlined it. He did that with two topics. When I undid this reoutlining, the edit didn't even show up in the page history. So I'm trying again. This time, instead of just changing the heading markup (from === to ==), I'm typing in text that I can sign. Hurmata (talk) 03:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Now that the 2008 Republican VP contest is over . . .
Now that Sarah Palin was chosen running mate two days ago, I expect the raging urge to push rumors about Charlie Crist to disappear. I'll just have to see; hasn't happened yet. Hurmata (talk) 00:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, still not yet. After scrubbing the latest dreck, I got a hunch. Sure enough, since me on 22 July and someone else on 17 July, nobody has added anything substantive to this article, meaning anything about Crist's actions as governor or his expressions of opinion about Florida affairs. And also between 9 July and 16 July, nothing of that kind. What's wrong, is the legislature out of session? I'm not overlooking that people have edited what was already in the article, but I'm referring to adding new topics or new information about topics. Hurmata (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Now, certain people will be waiting with bated breath for the December wedding to be called off. Hurmata (talk) 02:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Yellow journalism by User:Researchnews in this article
User:Horologium has reverted today's edit by User:Researchnews. Rightly so. The edits cited only one reference, an annual report by the state Auditor General. However, some of User:Researchnews's charges were not contained in that report. A possible source for the remaining charges is a letter to the editor of a Florida newspaper in August 2008. This letter contains the "7 percent, 93 percent" statements, the news about the federal Dept of HHS "putting Florida's MFCU on probation", and -- tellingly -- the ungrammatical use of the pronoun 'on' that crops up in User:Researchnews's edit. (It is of course possible that these talking points had been published earlier elsewhere and were just picked up by this particular letter writer.) However, User:Researchnews -- a user with a blank user page -- failed to acknowledge that Crist had only been on the job (as Attorney General) for less than a month when the Feds issued this chastening -- i.e., everything in the Feds' complaint (assuming the validity of the complaint) happened before Crist had responsibility for the problems. Hurmata (talk) 02:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Oops, forgot to give the URL for the document I referred to. It's http://www.northcountrygazette.org/2008/08/17/florida_fraud/. Hurmata (talk) 02:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
User:ResearchnewsI am new to Wikipedia. In time I believe my grammar will improve and I will learn about the user page so it is no longer blank. My doctorate is in Medical Biology and Statistics, not grammar. I am open to learning. For over four years I have researched Charlie Crist (as Attorney General and Governor) in his relationship with the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. Three references were cited. One of the references was removed on the Attorney General report page (audit report No. 2004-033). Prior to removing it, I made a copy. The other two references are also audit reports. I consider these reliable references. In addition, I am the author of the article you refer to in the North County Gazette. Is it yellow journalism on my part, when I relay the information from the audit report using their numbers, but presented in a different light?
The audit report states "1270 cases closed by the MFCU." The reader is left believing the MFCU is doing a great job, until you read further in the audit report. It discloses only 88 cases resulted in convictions and the remainder were unfounded or lacked evidence. That means 1182 cases and thousands of lives were destroyed, in order for Crist to remove Florida from a “high risk status” and the MFCU from probation. When reliable and referenced information is removed is that considered censorship? [1] Researchnews (talk) 12:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)Researchnews (talk) 17:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Max Linn's accusation
I have a question on this entry - someone else put it in - "In 2006, controversy surrounding a proposed gay marriage ban and rumors about Crist's own sexuality were stirred when Reform Party candidate Max Linn claimed that he believed Charlie Crist to be gay." I would like to see it placed in chronological order, because it is something that dates to 2006, placing it at the beginning of the section if it stays- if it is edited out I would like someone else higher up the chain to make the decision to edit it out - I really don't want to get into the dialogue on the discussion page about this issue - so some editorial direction on that entry would be helpful. Also "Max Linn" should have brackets around it to point to his article page, however his article page seems to be in question about whether it is to be removed. --4rousseau (talk) 19:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have been removing the information repeatedly, primarily because of the way it had been framed by the various editors who had been adding it before (mostly IP addresses, plus User:Researchnews), but at least this time the framing was not so outrageously over-the-top, it correctly identifies Max Linn as one of his opponents in the Gubernatorial race, and the sources are better than the previous offerings. I still think it's an undue weight issue, but at least it's well sourced (no axe-grinding columnists, gossip columns from marginal free newspapers, and blogs), mindful of NPOV, and in a section that is relevant to the topic. I'm punting on this one. Horologium (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Max Linn's accusation should have stayed... people have been arguing about whether or not to put the plethora of gay rumors on this page for about 5 years now. Too many people are defending Crist's reputation because of a political agenda. The page is currently telling a lie by creating the idea that the only reference to Crist being gay was in the movie "Outrage" but that ignores the MANY accusations which lead up to the film. I added the Max Linn statement and was finally told by an editor that it could stay because it was properly sourced and was significant enough. Let's not forget that there were the two Republican aides who claimed (publicly) to have slept with him... It's not like these rumors don't have any foundation. 98.203.23.189 (talk) 08:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Trade mission to Europe in July 2008
Discussion of deletions made in this subsection.
- "Crist did not give an explanation for why a Spanish solar company was required, rather than a domestic solar company". No explanation needed: long before globalization, corporations were doing business multinationally — clients were considering foreign vendors, and vendors were making sales in foreign countries. Beyond that, Crist could have made a trade mission to California, which would be within the same country but would be about equally distant, hence about equally expensive in travel costs.
- "There also were questions raised about the seriousness of the trip events, given the participation of the Governor's fiancee, Carole Rome" The reference cited does not substantiate this. The reference is a gallery of 46 photos with captions. If you're going to cite one of these photo captions, integrity demands you cite the photo number, just as you would not cite a quote from a 400 page book and leave out the page number. I found a caption (to photo number 7?) where a British newspaper alleged vaguely that Crist was "under fire for a 'jaunt'". This is not a sufficient reference. After about photo number 26, I quit the search for the damning captions. Beyond this, it is unworthy of WP to report that being accompanied by one's fiancee on a trade mission raises questions about the seriousness of the mission. Of course there will be "photo ops" and obsequious niceties spoken, that's irrelevant. The fact that one prime minister will host a visiting foreign prime minister at a gala dinner does not lead anyone to suppose that no business of state was transacted.
- Embraer in Melbourne". There is only one place that said this, a Miami Times/Herald article. Point 1, Embraer is Brazilian, not European. Point 2, Embraer's expansion came in May 2008, two months before the controversial trade mission to Europe. Either the Times/herald had a brain fart in quoting the governor, or the governor had a brain fart in composing the press release. Either way, the content is so grossly unfactual that WP would need to strongly verify it, especially in a BLP. Hurmata (talk) 08:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
so if it is legitimate source quoting what you call a "brain fart" as a fact- then that fact needs to be purged by you from the article?--4rousseau (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Kirby Dick's documentary Outrage includes Crist
Kirby Dick is an article in WP, his movie Outrage is an article in WP, thus the two items when paired with Crist are worthy of being addressed in this article. So, I have attempted to include the item as part of Crist's bio in as objective a manner possible. There have been attempts to add this item in recent days - posted and removed -posted and removed etc- however, those attempts were written in an inflammatory style, bordered on vandalism and did not cite references. Hopefully, future edits will include well sourced material and will be written objectively.--4rousseau (talk) 23:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with John Broughton's recent edits to make this article more npov, such as retitling the blatantly opinionated "Reverses position on offshore oil drilling" and removing the section "Greer under fire", which is very unbalanced. However, this article still has problems with imbalance, non-neutral tone, and undue weight. It seems to be largely one-sided, heavy on the critics and noticeably absent supporting views for balance. By simply listing all the legislation that Crist has voted for or against as governor with little context or balance is more a collection of indiscriminate information than a biographical article.
- I've asked for a BLP review of the "Personal life" section's supposed "outing" content, as the use of left-wing opinion blogs such as salon.com and huffingtonpost and an obscure indie film do not constitute reliable secondary sources required by BLP for defamatory content. It it also a misreresentation to characterize such as "mainstream media". This kind of highly negative content requires solid, secondary sourcing such as Time magazine, The NY Times, Associated Press, etc., to comply with WP:BLP. Indeed, even the Variety movie review says the film may have libel issues. JGHowes talk 21:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
" as the use of left-wing opinion blogs such as salon.com and huffingtonpost" -- they are not solely left wing blogs - to describe them solely as such conveys a right wing bias to me, but I assume good faith.--4rousseau (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that the structure used for this article isn't the greatest, and also that the writing is not as neutral as I would like. I also think that perhaps the "Outrage" film information doesn't belong; its sourced to blogs (and Variety of all things), and given the claims I think we should ask for a higher degree of sourcing here. This article, like any BLP, is intended to be a full and complete biography - but a major claim of hypocrisy and homosexuality, with scant coverage and no evidence, doesn't make the cut in my mind. Nathan T (formerly Avruch) 14:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
"(and Variety of all things)"-- Variety is a trade magazine over 100+ years old. --4rousseau (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I have included several additional sources the NY Times, NPR, LA Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Washington Post in addition to the original sources posted.--4rousseau (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
There are no solid sources for the rumors of homosexuality regarding Charlie Crist, though as a Floridian I can tell you these rumors have been around for decades and predate the "liberal blogs" that JGHowes cites as the ultimate source for such. And "Max Linn" isn't the sole person to come forward making accusations. He's just the first to get widespread coverage. Be that as it may, there is, as noted, no solid evidence, and the governor denies it. Whether you follow the adum of "where there is smoke there is fire" is a personal choice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JackFloridian (talk • contribs) 13:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Section removed: "Greer under fire"
I've removed this section, which only very peripherally concerns Crist (he appointed Greer and he supported Greer after some questioned Greer's actions). I'm not even sure that the section would be worth including in the bio of Greer himself, since it's basically an argument over the most effective use of political funds (yawn); no illegalities are even alleged. In any case, the removal from this article is per WP:NPOV; an entire section (or even, in my opinion, a single sentence) on this matter is clearly undue weight and space. (Removed wording follows.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- One day after the RGA conference, Jim Greer, the Republican Chairman in Florida appointed by Crist and a long time friend and Crist staffer, came under fire from fellow GOP McCain staff in Florida with regard to how the party was spending its money during the election. Some questioned payments made for Tampa Bay Rays games, New York Yankees games, trips to Disney World, and $682,000 on chartered planes; and wondered why the funds were not spent on air time for television and radio advertising. Greer and others responded that they were operating within the rules and such expenditures had to be made in order to court major donors. Greer also stated that all funds had been offered to the McCain campaign in Virginia, and the McCain headquarters returned the funds back to the Republican Party of Florida. [2] Crist immediately sent a letter detailing his support for Greer and his endorsement of Greer's re-election as chair of the party in Florida. [3]
it is always fascinating to see the new folks who arrived at an article for the first time on the date a pol launches a campaign. the section on greer remains-- it is consistent with the paragraphs preceding it -- it details the dynamics of the FL Republican party and Crist's involvment and how it affects Crist, who is the subject. Also, the subject for Ban on Gay Adoption remains because it is an existing ban the Gov supports -- not a general topic of Gay Adoption-- same thing with civil unions etc. attempting to replace "minority groups" with the term "cultural issues" lacks an understanding and sophistication about the subject and how it is discussed in academia and other spheres--4rousseau (talk) 21:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, I agree with the changes that John made to the article, as they did a lot to restore an NPOV balance that was lacking in this article. The headings should be generic and rather sterile; the text following the headings is where it is appropriate to detail his views on the subject. I have reverted to John's last version, restoring his NPOV headings and removing the coatracky section on Greer. Horologium (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- I have made many attempts to not be coatracky-- in fact removing other edits that were off the charts. I trust Horologium's call on this -- don't know John etc, never saw that handle before on this article etc..--4rousseau (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- One final thing, i think culture, race, minority status are distinctly different things--listing "cultural issues" misses the mark in a number of ways.--4rousseau (talk) 22:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll coast on Horologium's reputation rather than mine. And yes, I agree that "Cultural issues" isn't quite right; all I can say in my defense is that it was "Minority groups" before, which was even more wrong. Perhaps "Social issues", or "Social and cultural issues"? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
why is "minority groups" even more wrong? they (gays, blacks) are demographically minorities in that region of the US. people are not born "socially black" so social issues and social cultural issues does not cover it. It is best to think of this in terms that the US Census uses --and demographically the census uses the term minorities.--4rousseau (talk) 00:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I want to reiterate that the issue John Broughton said he "yawned" over -namely use of campaign funds- plays into Crist's runoff against his opponent fellow Repub. Marco Rubio and how the Repub. party Greer heads up is assessing each candidate.--4rousseau (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Removal of facts from article on Carole Rome Crist
"Hurmata" removed several factual contributions to the Carole Crist article - the main reason stated is because some of the facts are already posted here. I would request Horologium to review the Carole Crist history and determine what sections should remain and also to address the request from Hurmata for deletion of the Carole Crist page etc. I think we need to deal with this now rather than ongoing as items come up related to the senatorial campaign. --4rousseau (talk) 22:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not going to get involved in editing Carole Crist, but reading through Hurmata's edits and the discussion on the talk page, the only things he removed that are relevant to this article are the trip expenses and fundraising thing, which are mentioned in this article already. Adding them to her article is a bit coatracky. The rest of his removals are gossip, poorly sourced and tangentially notable trivia, or information about her ex-husband's remarriage, which is utterly irrelevant. There's not a lot of notability asserted in the article (first spouses are not inherently notable; more than half of the people at List of current United States first spouses are either redlinks or redirects to their spouses, and there are a number more that should join them (Lou Rell, Lori Easley, Mariclare Culver, Marsha Barbour, Barbara Richardson, Mikey L. Hoeven, and Jenny Sanford). I'm not going to redirect it or nominate it for AfD, but it's certainly a valid candidate, and if it were to be nominated, I'd !vote to delete. BLPs of individuals who are not inherently notable (or notable only by proxy) are tricky things, and easy to make into coatracks, even when that is not the intent. Horologium (talk) 11:16, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
i am pasting the above to carole crist's discussion page as well -along with this reply-since you agree with Hurmata that the Carole Crist article should be a candidate for AfD-- yet no one has placed that flag on the article. Some of what Hurmata removed related to the private corporate jet industry- Todd Rome, Carole's ex runs Blue Star Jet, Carole sat in at the table at meetings with Crist and aviation industry experts on the European trade trip, ---all of this was purged by Hurmata. Is this just coatracky info? I don't think so.
Crist had knee surgery in June 2008 - he recuperated at Jill Zarin's home in the Hamptons - Jill Zarin and the Housewives of New York City (along with the entire franchise) are WP articles that are routinely visited and edited --and this information was also removed. The New York Housewives pages are part of WP- Crist spent his recuperation at Jill Zarin's home and then shortly thereafter proposed to his Carole, whose home "Chateau Rome" appeared in the show and she is good friends with Zarin.
and here are the links if anyone cares to see re:friendship between Real Housewives Zarin and Carole Rome Crist --
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2009/03/lost-footage-of-floridas-first-lady-on-real-housewives.html --4rousseau (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
and
http://jillzarin.com/jills-blog/summer-update-from-the-hamptons/ --4rousseau (talk) 19:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Carole_Crist"
The framework/infrastructure for creating pages for each new first lady of each state is something WP allowed to be created and to take up that bandwidth. I find it interesting that it is discussed as a possible AfD- since all the little nifty boxes showing incumbent predecessor etc are listed on those pages just as they are for the Governors. It would be odd not to have info that is posted on both Michelle Obama's page as well as Barack Obama's page or Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, or Laura Bush and George W. Bush. Yet, here that practice is treated as a redundancy if any linkage is implied, odd.
My hope is that this article does not become Palinized-- i.e. what happened to Sarah Palin's page when she was announced as McCain's running mate. --4rousseau (talk) 14:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- I have responded on Talk:Carole Crist, which is a more appropriate location for this discussion. Horologium (talk) 18:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Potential sources for expansion (was "Further reading" section in article)
Per WP:GTL and WP:EL, "Further reading" is supposed to be used for offline sources, and to be the equivalent of the "External links" section. Moreover, Wikipedia has no provision for keeping ELs in the article if they don't meet WP:EL criteria, but are potential sources. So I'm moving the section here, so that these sources don't get lost.
- [1] Morgan, Lucy (May 9, 2005). "Crist Will Enter Governor's Race." St. Petersburg Times, pp. 1A.
- [2] 1998 U.S. Senate race results.
- [3] Bousquet, Steve (February 18, 2006) "Crist's landlord reportedly takes illegal tax exemption" "St. Petersburg Times"
- [4] March, William (January 8, 2006) Tampa Tribune
- [5] (February 13, 2006) "Candidate's Fundraiser Uncovers Questionable Supporters" "Miami Herald"
- [6]Tisch, Chris (January 17, 2005) "The Woman Who Asked Charlie That Question" "St. Petersburg Times"
- [7]Capital Bureau
- [8] Attorney seeks to block steroid questions in corrections lawsuit
- [9] (October 3, 2006) "Book: Crist tried to "whitewash" probe" "The Gainsville Sun"
- [10] Miller, John J. (April 7, 2008). "He's No Jeb Bush." National Review.
I suggest that if/when a source above is incorporated into the article, it be struck through (use the <s> and </s> tag pair). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Recent edit
I spent a bit of time this evening working on this article in a userspace subpage (User:Nathan/Crist if you're interested) and I think I've made some improvements to the article overall, while keeping most of what was already there. There was an enormous amount of very good sourcing on the article, most of which remains, but my approach has been to make the following changes:
- I've eliminated most of the policy-area specific headers, because they generally contained only one issue each and the formatting didn't allow for placing them in the proper context
- I've removed some information on relatively minor policy issues, and condensed the remainder into a somewhat cohesive narrative that focuses on Crist as an individual and a politician as opposed to chronicling specific events during his term. My thinking here is that we are writing a comprehensive biography, as opposed to a detailed account of his tenure as governor, and while the former is achievable the article was a fairly haphazard attempt at the latter
- I've condensed the presidential campaign and other political activity not related to his role as governor (as opposed to the role of a prominent Floridian politician) in a "Political activity" section
- I've expanded the introduction somewhat, and removed the references (see WP:MOS#LEDE). For a high quality article, the intro ought to be a wide-angle overview of the contents of the article - and everything broadly described in the intro should have a more detailed treatment in the body of the article (hence references in the intro are unnecessary).
I think, and I hope you'll agree, that this version of the article goes a ways towards making the article conform with the standard Wikipedia style for biographies (and those of politicians specifically). If folks are amenable, I think this article could potentially become a GA or even an FA with some more work on the intro, ref formatting and copyediting. Nathan T 03:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
it looks horrible now, and has a lot of important information scrubbed, and really really bad grammar--4rousseau (talk) 05:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
This article is being sanitized, scrubbed
suddenly the references for two of Crist's moderate appointments to the court have been removed. it now looks like some sort of People magazine article. a chopped up version of the original article is now what appears--grammatical errors at every turn- run on sentences all over the place, apostrophes missing,commas needed. Many many problems. It is just really too bad that someone's political bias has resulted in this hatchet job-- and that is the kindest that can be said about it. I am referring to the edit job done by Nathan T and posted on 03:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC) --4rousseau (talk) 05:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I restored Nathan's revision, as it was an enormous improvement over the previous version. There are some grammar issues, but the structure of the article is much tighter and better organized. Add apostrophes and capitals where needed, and maybe tweak the formatting of individual sentences, but don't revert back to the previous version again, please. Horologium (talk) 11:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, a fair bit of copyediting is definitely necessary. I'll try to get to that today, restructuring and framing the content was my mission yesterday. Nathan T 14:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
section below pasted in from living persons biographies noticeboard:
Charlie Crist, Outrage (documentary), Palinized major revision and Carole Crist article
- Charlie Crist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I am concerned that adding defamatory content about the so-called "outing" of the Florida governor ("Personal life") is contrary to BLP. A wider consensus on this is requested. It relies on an indie film Outrage (documentary) and opinion blogs such as salon.com and huffingtonpost, without any reliable secondary sources. The article Outrage (documentary) has similar concerns. JGHowes talk 21:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've compiled and edited in a rewrite of this article, and proposed on the talkpage that it be accepted as a starting point for further development. Comments invited and welcome. Nathan T 03:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The section on Outrage the documentary within the Charlie Crist article is well sourced, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, San Francisco Chronicle among others- JGHowes needs to take a look at it. The article page for the documentary itself should have its own section on this page, like the Carole Crist issue, because they are separate articles.
Last night the Charlie Crist article underwent a major revision by Nathan.
The two conservative state supreme court judges Crist appointed were left in the article, however two of the moderate state supreme court judges were removed along with the references.
Over fifty different other footnotes were deleted, purged.
There are sections of the article now that have paragraphs beginning mid sentence with no capital letter at the beginning of the sentence, many misspellings,grammatical errors and it looks very crude--not a good way to represent content for WP image.
This article looks like it is getting Palinized--there is an attempt to only highlight Crist's conservative actions and remove content that details his moderate actions. It also mischaracterizes Crist's relationship to environmental groups.
I would appreciate someone higher up the chain to take a look at what has been done to the Charlie Crist article and the Carole Crist article- how they appeared prior to major purges of information made by Nathan and Hurmata (talk) and to advise on what content should be part of the article and what should not be purged.--4rousseau (talk) 15:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The article on Crist's wife Carole Crist has also had content purged without a good reason: the fact that she has two daughters and the name of her ex husband removed from the article even though this information is well sourced and widely seen in print publications. Details on her divorce date were also removed. And her participation in an expensive and unpopular overseas economic trade trip were also purged from her article. Also, her appearances on the Real Housewives of New York was purged.--4rousseau (talk) 16:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Frankly, many of the grammatical and other copyediting errors were present before my revision. I've fixed some of them, and plan to do more polishing, but I think a comparison of the revisions shows that the current version is superior in a number of ways. The article on Crist's wife is something I don't know anything about, although I suspect that we have an article at all is probably inappropriate. Some footnotes were removed, that is true - a chunk of content that chronicled political developments in Florida but weren't relevant to a biography was condensed, and in the process approximately a quarter of the 200 or so references became unnecessary. I wouldn't object to reincorporating some of that content into the article, if it can be done without returning to the former disorganized and disjointed format. Nathan T 16:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
due respect, but , Nathan, your response simply is not true. many of the grammatical errors were not present prior to your revision. License plates were not referred to as License place-- broken links to Partial Birth Abortion etc were not broken links prior to your edit.
you also did not address the removal of info on the moderate judge appointments. i simply can't continue to believe that you are operating in good faith if you can't acknowledge that, in your haste to post a new version of the article, you made a lot of errors that make the article read like an elementary school paper rather than a high quality live page in WP- please at least be honest about the facts of what can clearly be seen in the history even if you can't be about the quality of your edits.--4rousseau (talk) 17:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I understand that you might be irritated at significant changes to an article that you've been expanding for about a year, but I submit that it would be more constructive to fix problems you identify rather than complain about them on a noticeboard. Copyediting is being done; some errors were made, some already existed. At any rate, issues about the article unrelated to the BLP policy should be discussed on the article talkpage rather than both there and here. Nathan T 17:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
what would have been most constructive would have been for you to operate with some collegial respect and to have reviewed your major revisions prior to posting, perhaps if you would have made the effort to correct at least the grammatical and form errors prior to posting- which you now want others to fix for you but not talk about-- perhaps the major revision would have been received better.
the intentional omissions and, in my view, attempts at obfuscation remain a problem however, and I believe others on this noticeboard need to be aware of what is happening to this article. --4rousseau (talk) 18:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry if you found my edit not collegial; I've made an effort to be collegial, which is why I have been ignoring your accusations of bias, whitewashing, etc. You are, of course, free to not correct any typographical or other errors you see in the article but I'm not sure why you would choose to do that. In the mean time, I've corrected the errors you noted and replaced mention of the moderate judges Crist appointed to the Florida Supreme Court. Nathan T 18:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
all details and resources on the Lawton Chiles Fund and the Chiles family potential lawsuit against Crist was removed, as well as Crist's response. instead the article makes statements like "the health insurance reform efforts have been well received - standing next to former football star Dan Marino,"--4rousseau (talk) 21:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
all balanced references that detail pros and cons on Crist's environmental policy have been removed, instead it now states "lauded by environmental groups for his opposition to coastal oil drilling and his efforts to restore the Everglades using land purchased with public funds"--4rousseau (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think I removed any references about the environmental stuff; what you've quoted is part of the intro. As for the Lawton Chiles controversy, it doesn't seem significant enough in the scheme of things (either his career as governor, or his life) to include in a biographical article. High profile public officials attract accusations and lawsuits, and the public coverage of this one seems to be pretty slim - which indicates to me that it isn't particularly serious or meaningful, and that argues against including an unresolved accusation of misappropriation of public funds in a BLP. Nathan T 13:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Sections that can be expanded
I'm going to try to do some work expanding the Florida Attorney General section, and adding some additional sources for the content that is there, particularly the lawsuit and the part about the AAG. The 2006 campaign section needs some additional work as well - - the bit about Convergys and the other critical bits need some clarifying, referencing and updating (since some events have presumably progressed since they were originally reported, and we should track down their current status). Nathan T 15:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Referencing needed
The Rev. O'Neal Dozier, a member of Crist's team and the Worldwide Christian Church, also generated controversy after being dismissed from his position on the Broward Judicial Nominating Commission for calling Islam a "cult" and a "dangerous religion" and opposing the construction of a mosque on the grounds that "we don't want our area to be a breeding ground for terrorists".[4] Crist initially declined to take action about Dozier and said that he was "happy" with the help he got.[5] However, he later told his staff to remove Dozier from all campaign committees, saying "While Charlie Crist respects Rev. Dozier's right to express his political and religious beliefs, he does not agree with Rev. Dozier's recent statements and writings concerning Islam".[6][7]
Crist's platform as a gubernatorial candidate included a "pro-life and pro-family" approach to abortion, characterized by $3,000 subsidies to adoptive parents and $5,000 subsidies to foster parents as well as support for limiting adoption to heterosexual prospective parents and banning gay marriage.[8][9]
The platform also included: advocacy for parent school choice and strict, standardized testing in education; tracking drug prescribing and dispensing; limiting the cost of homeowners insurance; report cards for insurance companies; abolition of Citizens Insurance; support for right to die legislation; legal protection for individuals in eminent domain cases; tort reform through the elimination of joint and several liability; property tax flexibility; support for Florida's Defense of Marriage Act; support for the death penalty[10]; gun rights (Crist endorsed by the National Rifle Association as an "A+" candidate)[11]; efforts to stop the combat growth in hate crime incidence; support for closed borders with promotion of legal immigration; opposition to further statewide expansion of legal gambling; and support for environmental protections such as a ban on off shore oil drilling near Florida's coastline.
Outrage again
While I have no desire to get into the wider issues surrounding the inclusion of this section, one of the comments I noticed was the claims most of the sources don't mention Crist by name. Using a simple browser search, I've checked all the sources and I'm come across a few that don't but also found most do. The NPR ones are one but given that The Huffington Post source (I'm presuming it's a RSS) mentions the NPR, there is perhaps some relevance so I'm willing to let that slide. But I don't see any reason for the inclusion of the WashingtonPost sources, neither of which appear to mention Crist. Remember this is an article on Charlie Crist therefore any coverage of the documentary should be how it concerns Crist and not general commentary. Nil Einne (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've removed the WP sources given the lack of any objection or explanation as to why they belong Nil Einne (talk) 13:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Assault on an Atheist
http://lifewithoutfaith.com/?p=3336 Maybe there's a sub-section in this. For now though I say we sit on this and see if it develops. Protectthehuman (talk) 22:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
GA Review
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Charlie Crist/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
There's a lot to like in this article, but it is not yet of GA standard. The prose falls short, though not so far short that it can't be repaired during this process. The biggest issue is the state of the article's referencing, which is at best average. I'm placing this on hold to allow for the concerns below to be addressed. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 00:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it well-written?
Fixed problems
|
|---|
|
It's not terrible, but it certainly needs some work to get to GA standard, especially in some sections (the 2008 presidential election section being probably the most seriously in need of TLC). Specific points:
|
Significant problems
|
|---|
|
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
The referencing in this article needs a great deal of work in both form and substance to reach GA standards. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 07:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Minor issues
|
|---|
(formerly Sarcasticidealist) 08:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
|
Significant problems
|
|---|
|
Is it broad in its coverage?
- Could the election results for Attorney General not also be included in the "Electoral history" section? Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 08:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- The "Record as governor" section seems somewhat sparse to me; being governor seems to be his primary claim to notability, but this section is shorter than the "Political activities" section, and not really that much longer than the section dealing with his election as governor. Are you sure that it covers all major aspects of his time as governor? Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 08:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- We're told that he was endorsed for attorney general based on his past work with the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, but to that point in the article we haven't heard anything about that work. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 16:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "A lawsuit stemming from the Ponzi scheme and investment scandal alleges that Crist and other state regulators failed to protect investors, and also cites campaign contributions." This could use some elaboration, among other reasons to address the current state of this lawsuit and whether Crist is personally named as a defendant. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 16:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "During the fall of 2006, Crist consistently led Democratic opponent Jim Davis in statewide opinion polling and so opted to skip a politically risky appearance with President George W. Bush. Crist had reasoned that the Pensacola area was already firmly in his camp..." Was this appearance scheduled to take place in Penascola? Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Further controversy set in, however, when ethics complaints were filed against Crist and his chief of staff for failing to investigate a major donor, personnel firm Convergys, that has been plagued by lawsuits and prison sentences for its role in the inadequate protection of state employees' social security numbers." What was the result of these complaints? Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Crist, one of the more popular Florida governors[34], has taken generally conservative positions on many social policy issues while also receiving criticism from time to time from Florida Republicans for his fiscal approach, for urging bipartisan cooperation - particularly with President Barack Obama, and for the rigor (or lack thereof) of his official schedule." Some of this needs some elaboration, specifically the bits about urging bipartisan cooperation and the lack of rigor in his schedule. This elaboration can either come here or later in the section. If any of these issues are not significant enough to be elaborated on, they're probably not significant enough to be mentioned. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- The bit on the extension of early voting hours needs to be reworked; it's not clear to me, as a reader, why this move was seen to hurt McCain, and that seems to be a critical part of it. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 00:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- "...their disapproval of how Palin's participation in the conference was handled." This needs elaboration. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 00:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it neutral?
Generally quite good (and I've read the recent discussions on the talk page). Minor qualms:
- I don't think that the treatment of his two failed bar exams. First of all, I'm not convinced that it's important to include. If it is, I'd suggest dedicating a sentence to it, rather than have what appears to be a snide parenthetical aside. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 05:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "...whose job-approval rating stood at 34 percent nationally and merely 29 percent within Florida." I'd suggest losing "merely"; the numbers speak for themselves, and there's no need for editorializing adverbs. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- The gubernatorial campaign section seems to me to give undue weight to Crist's ethics woes and the Dozier stuff - a single sentence about polling, nothing about the results, very little about Crist's interaction with his opponent...I think what's in there now is appropriate (i.e. no need to take anything out), but I think if you want that large a section on the campaign you need to add other information for balance (and of course if it gets too long, you can hive some of the information off to the election article itself, as long as you maintain balance when doing so). Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- The paragraph about Crist's 2006 platform reads as if it was lifted straight from his brochure. For example, "Pro-life and pro-family" is more rhetoric than a substantive statement of position, "...for assurance of safety and proper health care" doesn't really mean anything, and "parent choice" needs elaboration. I'd suggest a complete rewrite of that sentence. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "...particularly on environmental policy, an important issue in Florida." I think just stating that this issue is important without explaining why is somewhat POV (the implication is that it's more important for Florida than for other states, which I presume is because so much of Florida stands to be underwater if the icecaps melt, but this should be spelled out and cited). Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Continuing in a role of environmental advocacy..." This seems fairly POV to me. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 22:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- "A few short months later..." Who says these were short months? Were they all Februaries? Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 23:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Crist emphatically stated..." The use of the adverb seems POV. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 00:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- "Crist abruptly left..." Here too. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 00:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it stable?
Yes - one little revert a few days ago, but the record of the article overall is clearly one of stability. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 07:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
Both images are good choices and verifiably in the public domain. The only niggling issue is that the caption of the photo of Crist in Brazil ends with a period even though it is not a complete sentence, which is a no-no under WP:CAPTION#Wording. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 07:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
First Black Governor?
The article states "and has been described as the state's "first black governor."" According to whom? What is the source for this? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.90.13.195 (talk) 22:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Crist Party Affiliation
Hello. I am a regular user of Wikipedia, and came across something on the Charlie Crist page that I feel needs to be addressed. Here is an exchange I had with a Wikipedia staff member:
Bushin2016 (talk) 23:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I found a second source, the Orlando Sentinel that also says he intends to run as an independent but remain a registered Republican and I revised the article with this information. If this changes, it will have to be updated again. 5Q5 (talk) 15:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about reverting you a minute ago, I was trying to respond. As far as I can tell that is the case: Crist himself is staying a Republican but is not going to be running as one. That is different than someone who is a registered independent.--Cúchullain t/c 16:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Gov. Crist has now changed his party affiliation to NPA (no party affiliation). Source. --Kudzu1 (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Include past affiliation?
I think that Crist's until-recent affiliation as a Republican should be noted in this article's infobox, as well as his current no-party status. The years he was registered as a Republican should also be included. For examples of this concept being used in other articles, refer to:
--Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 09:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, this should be done. Your suggestion, go ahead. 5Q5 (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I would, but I don't have the year that Crist first registered as a Republican. I am not a Floridian, I just thought that adding his past affiliation would be of benefit to the article and be consistent with articles of others who have switched parties, as listed above. Whoever wants to make this addition, please feel free to do so. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
- Resolved: It appears that an editor has included a timeline of his party affiliations in the infobox. 5Q5 (talk) 17:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
- I would, but I don't have the year that Crist first registered as a Republican. I am not a Floridian, I just thought that adding his past affiliation would be of benefit to the article and be consistent with articles of others who have switched parties, as listed above. Whoever wants to make this addition, please feel free to do so. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 05:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Critics of Crist's Senate run
I want to store these here in case the guy wins, or if he is a presidential or vp candidate someday, and they could be used to source a line. 5Q5 (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Why Crist is done. ... Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is the saddest of political spectacles.
— Charles Hurt, New York Post, April 30, 2010. Column name: Inside Washington, Columnist: Charles Hurt, page 10
T is for triumph in Crist cross. As an independent, Gov. Charlie Crist is finished.
— Rich Lowry, New York Post, May 1, 2010. Column name: Rich Lowry, page 17
- ^ http://www.myflorida.com/audgen/pages/pdf_files/2008-012.pdf, page 1
- ^ Miami Herald "Republicans ask Florida GOP to explain spending" http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/773319.html
- ^ Miami Herald "Crist quickly comes to Greer's defense in finance spat" http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2008/11/crist-quickly-c.html
- ^ Besen, Wayne (July 13, 2006). "Anything but straight". Falls Church News-Press. Retrieved 2008-10-15.
- ^ "Religious Tolerance is Booed loudly". The Miami Herald. 13 July 2006.
{{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help)[dead link] - ^ "Crist dumps preacher who ranted on Islam". The Miami Herald. 23 September 2006.
{{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help)[dead link] - ^ "Pastor appointed by Bush won't apologize for remarks on Islam". Associated Press). July 11, 2006.[dead link]
- ^ "Crist would sign abortion ban, discusses adoption proposal". Naples Daily News. March 23, 2006.
{{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help)[dead link] - ^ "Gallagher Takes Off the Gloves; Crist Retaliates". The Tampa Tribune. August 21, 2006.
{{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help)[dead link] - ^ "Execution Puts Crist To Test". Tampa Bay Online (TBO.com). December 15, 2006. [dead link]
- ^ NRA candidate scores