Talk:Carl Levin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] 10 Best Senators
Time magazine just named Mr. Levin one of the top ten senators currently serving in congress. I believe someone sould add something about it. Link to article http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1184028,00.html --The Sess 13:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Press
he really did literally , expressly state that that's what he was talking about at the PRess Club speech. maybe you haven't looked closely at the language of that speech. Kɔffeedrinksyou 16:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
This seems to be biased towards Carl Levin in the whole Bills and Policies section ("Senator Levin is perhaps best known for his working of improving the ethics of the federal government"). It also seems to be against Canada in the environment section. Qmwne235, 19:02, 28 July 2006
-
- I agree! The Bills and Policies section reads almost like something off his official web site or campaign site. There are no external references or sources quoted for the praise that Levin's policies receive in this section. (Disclaimer: I grew up in Michigan and am personally a supporter of Senator Levin.) Moxfyre 16:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I addressed the points mentioned above in the article, and removed the NPOV tag. Morris 12:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comb over
Carl Levin is the featured person in the Comb over article, and as such, I believe a link to said article should be included. Unfortunately, one Wikipedia user disagrees with me and keeps reverting my inclusion of said link. Not only that, but he convinced a moderator I am in violation of the 3rr, despite the fact I corrected the article only once. Linking to the article is not pejorative or slanderous, the man obviously has a comb-over; it is perfectly relevant. Professor London 22:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not an administrator, Professor London, and User:Abe.Froman didn't ask anyone to intervene. I noticed these edits, reverted a clear addition of nonsense to the article, and notified you that you were about to violate WP:3RR. There is no legitimate reason to add this link to an article about a United States Senator. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 22:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- second that. Abe Froman 22:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The picture up now is way better, anyway. Thanks!Professor London 00:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Energy Policy
Following the sentence
- In 2005, Congress passed the 2005 Energy Policy.
I inserted this HTML comment, which is of course invisible except when editing the article or viewing the source:
What bill is this, and why is this discussion here? The Energy Policy Act of 2005, S.10, was sponsored by Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and had zero cosponsors. In particular, Carl Levin didn't cosponsor this bill, so why is this discussion here?
Articles aren't really the right place for such comments, so I will remove the comment along with the entire discussion on the bill, unless someone can tie this bill to Sen. Levin. Anomalocaris 20:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I in all honesty the entire Energy section shouldn't be here after the first brief paragraph. It is all analysis/opinion, and is not really fitting for an encyclopedia. 156.33.26.85 17:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)Chuddery

