Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GreekParadise (talk | contribs) at 00:21, 26 October 2008 (→Possible edit warring on Sarah Palin: .). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Obama relatives

Are Sarah onyango obama and Madelyn Lee Payne notable for anything other than being relatives of Barack Obama? If not, they should be merged into Barack Obama. Jfire (talk) 04:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, that's their only relevance. They are the living grandparents of Barack Obama. (But I can't edit him because he's locked.) However, the details of Sarah Obama's life are interesting, as is the fact that she lives in a remote Kenyan village and that Obama has visited her. User:GreekParadise

Ah, I see, it's semi-protected. I will tag them as candidates for a merge, and then when your 4 days are up you can merge them there. I agree that that's interesting, it's just that per our notability guideline, unless they're notable on their own account, they should be covered in the Barack Obama article rather than in standalone articles. Anyway, welcome to Misplaced Pages, hope you like it here! :-) Jfire (talk) 04:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion on NPOV Sarah Palin? TAKE TWO

Please post at talk, thanks. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 03:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying...

But we need to be realistic on how much of a "sore" we're exposing by picking away the scab and dead skin at the edges. Fcreid (talk) 16:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

LOL. The bridge section has been relatively stable in recent weeks. That's OK. I left a message on Threeafterthree's talk page. I gave himm 45 minutes to explain himself or I'd revert. His 45 minutes are about up and I'll do it. Meanwhile, I found my citation -- yay! -- I'll put it on the main Sarah Palin talk page.GreekParadise (talk) 16:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I also thought we were making headway on the less contentious article improvements, but it appears I may have been overly optimistic. I see the section you mean (about the whales), but I wasn't really focused on that. This elephant has grown far too big to eat except in small bites. Unless something blatantly offensive or misguided was put in the article, I avoid reverting like a plague (and, as shallow as it sounds, I'm loathe to "pick sides" on a topic of so little consequence). Thus, it's probably best if knock out my other planned projects today while you work out the whales issue with Tom. I think we can collaboratively make the bridges section a better piece at some point. Thanks for your GF, GP. Fcreid (talk) 16:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, that's again another likely casualty of mixed bridge metaphors. I don't think Palin herself today would deny continuing support for Knik Arm, as that actually seems to scratch an entirely different itch and, at least in the scheme of other national transportation projects, is probably sane. With my limited OR and understanding, I also conclude that Gravina Island was was probably an ill-conceived "pork barrel" project from the start and, indeed, can be seen as symbolic of federal wasteful spending. The surrounding controversy, at least as it relates to Palin's "yes, no, maybe, no thanks" speeches, is really legitimate "stuff" of this article. In contract, with the exception of the environmental issues that remain to be resolved (as is the case in any projects of that scope), one can make compelling arguments supporting Knik Arm--certainly far more justifiable than Gravina, as it opens up the area for urban expansion, commuter transit and other things that provide an appreciable ROI. That's not to discard any legitimate arguments whether it's the best use of scant funds, or whether the fed should be funding part or all of it. Anyway, this still goes to the unfortunate commingling of bridges, and I think this section would have been so much less contentious from the start had both not been lumped together. The facts, opinions and controversies surrounding both are vastly different, and the commingling (no matter how well reliably sourced) just seems to be a synthesis of one side of the Palin argument itself. Fcreid (talk) 17:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Nope, not at all, and I probably didn't make myself clear. She absolutely supported both (and probably still supports the one), so both warrant mention in this article (including, perhaps, the ongoing feasibility and environmental impact studies for Knik Arm). It's undeniably nonsensical to contend the Bridge to Nowhere would have derived substantial benefit in excess of its costs (with no disparagement intended to the impacted Alaskans) beyond being a long-term financial construction gravy train. In contrast, at first blush on Knik Arm, I don't see the same symbolism of wasteful spending (be that federal or local) due to compelling arguments for its intended purposes. Hell, we're still working on a bridge here in DC () which is now running up near $3B (with a "B") on its price tag! Bridges are expensive, but some are also necessary. :) Fcreid (talk) 17:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Possible edit warring on Sarah Palin

You might want to pop by my talk page and review the diffs presented there... at first glance it looks to me like you have been edit warring. Do you think that's a fair characterization? I think keeping the discussion there might be good since I only archive occasionally. ++Lar: t/c 20:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I responded there. I'm not concerned. I did everything properly. And I would ask that Collect, before he goes running to Administrators, state on the TALK PAGE why he repeatedly wants to remove notable, relevant, brief material on Palin (like her support of the bridge in the bridge section). Repeatedly removing material that forms the heart of the article without even stating one is doing so, much less giving a valid reason on the talk page, is very bad wiki-behavior, particularly when more than a dozen editors have repeatedly told Collect to stop it. Collect has made thousands of edits to Palin. He should know better.GreekParadise (talk) 00:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Finally, Collect, I ask you to stop the ad hominem attacks NOW. I will work with you but this petulant behavior of your has to stop.GreekParadise (talk) 00:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)