Talk:Randy Kuhl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

	Randy Kuhl is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. The options are: "FA", "A", "GA", "B", "Start", "Stub", "List", "Disambiguation", "Template", or "Category."
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. The options are: "Top", "High", "Mid", and "Low."
???	This article has not yet been assigned a subject. The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", and "Event."

172.142.242.185 and 204.168.97.160, we know who you are. This is no place for political propoganda. That's what franking privilege is for. Watch out -- this wouldn't look good in the press.

[edit] Campaign Websites

It seems inappropriate to list the campaign website for his likely opponent in the links section. There is no link to Kuhl's campaign site on Eric Massa's page. If someone is looking for Eric Massa's campaign site, aren't they likely to go to his Wikipedia page to find it, not Kuhl's? If there is no objection, I intend to remove that link in a couple of days. If anyone feels different, please post here. Thanks. Souldrifter 18:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the link to massa's campaign should stay. I reciprocated by linking to Kuhl' campaign site on the Eric Massa page, something I had done before, but someone removed it. I now watch both Kuhl's and Massa's pages and will ensure that the campaign links stay (unless of course there is some sort of consensus that they should be deleted) thanks for the heads-up Souldrifter User:Cjs56

It still seems goofy to me, personally, to list the opponent's campaign site on either page...however since each page has a link to the opponent's campaign site, at least it is fair...since you've contributed way more to these two particular articles than I have, I don't have a problem with your judgement... and since my reasoning is based on a personal opinion, not on any wikipedia guidelines and no harm is done, I'll shut my mouth and let you do your thing. Thanks for the response and for the dedication to the articles. Souldrifter 17:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I repeat the admonition of the gentleperson whose comments begin this page: This is not a place for propaganda; that is what the franking priviledge is for. I re-entered the information about the contents of the papers, which are historically noteworthy. I also reinserted the link to Massa's website as the Massa page reciprocates in this matter. I'm watching you: 216.144.250.162 --Cjs56 22:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note to 69.249.253.211

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.166.224.67 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 25 October 2006

[edit] POV tags

We're not mind-readers here. If you want to put a POV tag on the talk page or a section of the article, fine, but it's then incumbent on you to go into SPECIFICS about why you consider the text to be POV. Citing a wikipedia policy gets you bonus points (and some credibility), but isn't manadatory.

I've removed the tags; feel free to put them back AFTER you've explained, on this page, why you're posting them. Also, please note that I shortened the section on "Domestic disputes" (as well as removing the section heading); I suspect that doesn't address your POV concerns but mention it just in case. John Broughton | Talk 22:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)