Talk:Eagle Mountain, Utah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article covers subjects of relevance to WikiProject Urban studies and planning, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
Utah Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Utah, a WikiProject dedicated to articles related to the U.S. state of Utah.
To participate: join (or just read up) at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.


Contents

[edit] POV edits

To the revisionist historian at city hall:

You are being watched. There is nothing in this article that is factually untrue. Stop changing the history to remove the stuff that makes you and your heroes look bad. If you have something constructive to add, put it in. Otherwise get off it. -- Dnaguy, 10:37, 15 June 2006

The current info in the article IS factual. I suggest that those who keep attempting to cover up the truth would do better to make decisions that they aren't embarrassed about later.
Councilman Blackburn suggests that more positive things could be ADDED without removing the true, negative things. I agree with him. Here are his ideas if anyone can take the time to write them up:
1) Living on the Pony Express route
2) One of the fastest growing communities in Utah
3) New and growing city
4) Conveniently located/situated for work or play in both UT and SLC counties
5) Bedroom community with a wide range of housing options
etc….
EM has some great qualities...even if the idiotic politics aren't one of them. -- 204.228.142.17, 19:03, 15 June 2006

[edit] Cleanup

This article need to be wikified. It also needs to be organised. For example, the history section has a lot of information that does not seem to be history. For that matter, I am not sure a history section is even needed for a community that is less than 10 years old. As well, there are a lot of claims here that should be cited. --Kmsiever 02:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the added photos of Eagle Mountain Homes.

[edit] To All Editors of this Page

To all editors of this page: Please remember that Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a publisher of original thought (original research), or a place for propoganda or advocacy of any kind. All information must be neutral and notable. Lately many editors have been adding more and more details to the bizarre history of Eagle Mountain in order to justify events or cast better light on certain individuals. This is not the place to do that. Only brief summaries should be allowed, and if something is found to be not neutral, please just remove it instead of adding unverified or uncited information. Events should be reflected accurately, even if it may appear negative to people close to the event. Please do not remove, change, or add information on this basis. Your cooperation with the Wikipedia guidelines is appreciated. -- Renesis (talk) 04:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedited

I came across this article while monitoring WP:AIV and I immediately saw it needed attention. The 'politics' section was not only twice the size of similar sections in articles about much larger cities, it was larger than _entire articles_ about those cities. A closer examination revealed duplicate and sometimes triplicate information, along with some unsourced statements that raised BLP concerns. I do not believe any editor intentionally added duplicate material or intended to cause BLP problems, but the article needed some tough love. Put another way, the article was larger than a talk page archive is supposed to be – by 12 kilobytes. It was enormous.

The article is smaller now by almost two-thirds, and most of the text I removed was from that 'politics' section. You can see how much smaller it is by looking in the revision history at the last edit before mine (47.6 KB) and the current version (13.6 KB).

I felt the 'climate' section belongs in an article about a larger area, so I redacted it. I also removed the 'economy' section along with its photos, because it contained only one pretty disparaging sentence about the only businesses being a pizza parlor and a gas station. It didn't do the town any service by staying in the article. The 'education' photos threw the whole look of the article off, so the photos are resting in the revision history also. I then cited a few more sources about the politics and controversies, and tidied up the sections and headings. There were way, way too many subheadings for an article that size.

If anyone is offended because "I trashed your work" or "it's not my town", I'm sorry – but the article is better now and will attract more readers. Long blocks of uninterrupted text turn off the attention of people who just want a brief overview. If I hadn't done it, someone else would have, so it's better to do it now. It's a better article after this copyedit; like the sign under the editing box says, don't write it if you don't want it edited mercilessly by others. It really needed merciless editing. However, if I missed any facts that can be sourced, please add them back. It is not my intent to choose one side or another – I'm just a copyeditor with the admin tools. ;-)

Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks. KrakatoaKatie 07:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Good job :) -- Renesis (talk) 16:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eagle Mountain, Utah

Renesis, thank you for being so valiant in your standards of editing. Unfortunately, you have blocked mark58 as a contributor...mark58 is following the former mayor, Brian Olsen's story with much interest. Factual citations are what I'm after. Yet, According to the paragraph alledging Olsen was under iunvestigation in the UHP alluding to something with charges resulting in an apparent resignation is suspect. The accompanying citation (10) has nothing to do with the statement and is therefore not a source. Just because a citation is listed , you automatically consider it legite? Please review the citation and see that someone else should be blocked for failing to cite a legitimate source. Thank You ....mark58 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.44.107.179 (talk) 18:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added two citations that back up, in entirety, everything that was included in the current text. Quit hiding behind claims of bad citations for blanket removal of blocks of text in this article -- it's pretty easy to do a search on the deseretnews.com website and find an article. In addition, I'm pretty sure that you, as a likely associate of Mr. Olsen, were aware that the text was correct in the first place. -- Renesis (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

_____________________________________________________________________________________ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.44.107.179 (talk) 20:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, your citation isn't verifiable that Olsen was under investigation for lying about a Master's Degree at the time of resignation. It is apparent that your comment that I'm an associate of Olsen's disparages the quest for factual evidence is being trumped by your personal feelings against Olsen. .....I have waited a long while to hear the truth about Olsen's case. I believe that a man is innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. Olsen's case is still pending a trial and we still have yet to hear Olsens defense. If I were an associate of Olsen I would be very interested in hearing his side of the story.

And it doesn't take much to realize the media in this country (including your power to block at whim your own personal vindications against someone) use the media to sell $$$ their stories for profit, sensationalizing stories just because someone said so and then the story cited has no verifiable citation to back up the claims,....incredible!... Your non-proffessionalism in attacking a truth-seeker is characteristic of the vicious politcs of the city in which this debate is now unfolding.... At the end of the day, the courts will settle this matter,...until then,...we will wait the verdict........mark58

I have no personal feelings against Olsen whatsoever. I have nothing to do with him. Let's break down the paragraph and see if it is backed up by the given citations:
  • Olsen resigned from office in October 2006, citing family and personal considerations.
    True. "Olsen cited "family and personal considerations" as the reason for his resignation, which is effective immediately." Deseret News, 10-20-2006, [1]
  • His resignation came three days before he was charged with seven felony counts alleging misuse of public funds.
    True. "Utah County prosecutors Monday filed seven third-degree felony counts of misuse of public funds against Brian Olsen, the controversial Eagle Mountain mayor who abruptly resigned Friday." Deseret News, 10-24-2006, [2]
Now, I can't help you at all if you have a problem with the Deseret News. However, I can tell you that it is a reliable source as defined by Wikipedia Policy at Wikipedia:Verifiability. My motives only concern subjects as they pertain to Wikipedia and Wikipedia policies. If your crusade is based on something else, take it elsewhere.
And, it's ironic of you to lecture me on professionalism when you can't even spell it! -- Renesis (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I missed the part about the master's degree which you had recently removed. However, this is also supported by both citations (except for the use of the phrase "under investigation"). I have added it back as such. -- Renesis (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)