Talk:Bill Sali

message: While I don't think this should be a political ad (as some edits today have attempted), there's a need for balance here. We need to keep the Newcomb comments but also add something to the effect that Sali's supporters tend to be pretty hard core for him. --Faustus37 20:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Balance

message: The following text (below) was taken verbatum from Bill Sali's official biography  and put on the wikipedia page.  I am not sure if we can use it with proper attribution and citation. Any other thoughts? Remember 20:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff from official webpage 

message: I have reverted 66.233.250.90's most recent edits. This is the second time he has vandalized the page with his views. I'll admit that most of the FACTS I put in the article do not reflect well on Sali; I have put in few facts that do make him look good because I myself don't know those facts. But one thing I have not done is to try and charactize the information myself with unflattering adjectives and commentary, something 66.233.250.90 does often. Some of his edits - particularly to "religion" in the info box - were good ones, and I redid them. Most were not. For instance, he likes to change the line "The third place finisher, moderate Sheila Sorensen, said of Sali," to "said moderately." Her quote has nothing to do with liberal, conservative, or moderate. It's character-based, not issue-based. And it's wrong to use Wikipedia to mock her political stances. He also changed the line "Many of these papers, such as the Spokesman Review, typically endorse Republicans, giving their anti-Sali endorsments of Grant added weight." to "Many of these papers, such as the Idaho Statesman, rarely endorse conservative Republicans, giving their anti-Sali endorsments of Grant dubious credibility." First of all, "weight" is different than "credibility." How much credibility an endorsement has is not the same as its weight and its importance; credibility is an opinion issue, and does NOT belong in a Wikipedia ENCYCLOPEDIA article. It is also silly to delete the line about the Spokesman. Finall, 66.233.250.90 changed "anti-gay marriage" to "affirms the heterosexual definition of marriage" - another opinion.
Unfortunately, I don't think 66.233.250.90 reads the discussion page, as suggested by his anonymity, so please keep an eye out for him. I'm unfamiliar with some of Wiki's editorial policies, so if you know an editor or whatever they're called, let him know. I'm certainly not against putting in facts that make Sali look good, such as a list of his legislative accomplishments, but personal opinion is a whole different story.
--texasmusician 7:09 PM, 16 November 2006 (Pacific)
This article, in its current form, appears not much more than texasmusician's lopsided collection of the most negative quotes he could find against Bill Sali. The article content has less to do with Bill Sali and more to do with what his political opponents think of him. It reads like a Democratic op-ed piece. Rather than simply remove the quote by Sheila Sorensen (as the irrelevant opinion that it is), I decided to leave it in as a sample of the shameless bias of the entire article. Adding the adjective "moderate" next to Sheila's quote contrasts beautifully with the content of her statement, which is anything but moderate. If there were a list of RINO politicians for the state of Idaho, Sheila would be at the top of it. As for the newspaper endorsements, there is no citation which supports the claim that any of them "typically endorse Republicans". The Idaho Statesman, in particular, is quite out of step with the political views of the state. If they ever endorse a Republican candidate, it is either because there is no Democrat running on the ballot, or because the endorsement of a RINO is better than endorsing a real conservative. But rather than remove the irrelevant topic from the article, I simply inverted the erroneous statement to correctly indicate the fact that these papers rarely endorse conservative Republicans. I left the remaining (and also irrelevant) description of their coverage unchanged, as evidence of this fact. Sadly, it seems texasmusician is intent on hovering over this article to make sure that it continues to reflect his openly admitted bias. --66.233.250.90 06:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous User 66.233.250.90 

message: Our anonymous friend, 66.233.250.90, is right - if the abortion/breast cancer link quotes are to be mentioned, Sali should be credited for citing actual studies and not making stuff up. The other anonymous fellow was wrong to revert it, and I'm sorry I didn't catch the missing studies earlier. However, it is also true that the major cancer groups (particularly the American Cancer Society) all disagree with those findings, and that should be mentioned as well. BEcause Sali is so well nown for the remarks, and because they played such a role in the debate, I feel they merit their own special section. Thanks, 66.233.250.90, for inserting the links to the studies Sali cites. I hope you find the further changes acceptable as well.
On another note, shame on Jidlla the Killa for the vandalism, and thank you Wknight94 for catching it. Lordkate, good minor edits. Hope you all had a happy Thanksgiving!
--texasmusician 01:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abortion/Breast Cancer

message: This enrty states that Sali is "in favor of immigration law overhaul". That's a rather vague description. Since the Republican Party is split between those who favor the bi-partisan, comprehensive approach and those who favor an enforcement-only approach, clarity is needed. The current language doesn't really tell the reader anything about the Rep.-elect's position. I'll do a quick edit to that section, if there's no objections.
--Wgbc2032 02:47, 26 December 2006 (MTC)
As long as you cite your sources and use objective language, go for it! Thanks!
--texasmusician 05:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Immigration

message: If there are no objections, I'd like to remove the biased tag from the article. After my little back-and-forth with our anonymous friend, I think the article has balanced out a lot more. Our joint efforts helped that front, I think - he would add balancing information to my admittedly-biased knowledge; I would tone down his biased language. Does the article still seem one-sided? If not, let's get rid of that tag.
--texasmusician 18:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page has been dorment for weeks now. I'm going to remove the neutrality boxes, unless somebody objects. --Wgbc2032 20:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Still Biased?

message: I erased changes earlier today, explaining myself. You changed it back, but didn't explain yourself here as I did, so I reverted. Why don't we seek a third opinion through the formal Wiki process? (Honestly, I don't see the problem with a prominent link and putting like with like, but I guess you do and just don't want to explain why. Did you file your rational for it away with your refusal to discuss anonymity?)
--texasmusician 02:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: I've gone through all the references and updated them. Some of them had changed or cannot be found; applicable edits to the article were made in those cases. Some new references need to be found as Sali's campaign site no longer contains his biographical information (family, previous jobs, etc). --健次(derumi)talk 16:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup of references

message: We should avoid using the nastier quotes directly. It can be pointed out that a smear campaign was being run on Bill Sali concerning his views and opinions, and that there are those who maintain low opinions of him. Repeating those smear quotes themselves would be to continue the campaign, in my opinion. --健次(derumi)talk 16:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you again for bringing a voice of sanity, and I certainly agree with you.  Texasmusician has been carrying the torch against Sali and even admits his bias.  Any political figure will have their personal opponents with strong negative opinions (which isn't newsworthy or encyclopedia worthy), but this handpicked collection of outbursts shows lack of self-control on their part and should not be made to reflect on Sali himself.  Texasmusician argues that these quotes are somehow noteworthy because they come from Republicans, but Texasmusician seems to be unaware that running on the Democratic ticket in Idaho is not a winning strategy.  In fact, the Democrats argue that Sali won his congressional seat, not on his platform or credentials, but simply because he was on the ballot as a Republican.  Unscrupulous Democrats and liberals have figured this out and run as Republicans themselves (aka Rhinos).  As a result, the Republican party in Idaho is more diverse and rancorous than in other states.  But none of this tells us anything about Sali himself, so thank you again. - 66.233.250.90 07:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not going to comment on anyone's biases here. As this is a live person's biography, we have to make sure it's neutral and conservative (in tone, not conservative/political bias). We can't have it slanted over into a cheerleading or demonization article — we might as well re-run all of the campaign adverts (which aren't reliable source as they're biased to sell or unsell a candidate or issue). --健次(derumi)talk 18:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Let's try not to see each other here as rivals or enemies, but as fellow editors. Differing opinions can lend huge insights when debated in a civil manner. A lot of good contributions have already been made to this article. --健次(derumi)talk 18:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incendiary quotes

message: I hae reason to believe that the 'anonymous friend' who has been making all the changes to this entry is actually on Sali's staff, perhaps his spokesman Wayne Hoffman. There is an anonymous blog called The Idahoan that was recently revealed (http://www.idahostatesman.com/richert/story/123153.html) to be registered in Hoffman's name, and the blog contains an entry making reference to repeated efforts to change this wiki entry (http://theidahoan.com/2007/07/15/psst-can-you-help-me-fool-the-public-thanks-much-.aspx
). I thought that it was frowned on for politicians' staff to turn Wiki entries into propaganda in this way.
71.209.17.152 12:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite possible (Sali's a controversial figure, and politicians have censored their own articles at WP before), but there is also WP:BLP to adhere to. Biographies for people currently living need to be conservative (ie., not flashy or sensationalist) and information would need to be backed up with reliable sources (newspapers articles yes, campaign adverts no, etc). If there's gloss on this article, it needs to be removed. If there is reason to believe that this article does not adhere to a neutral point of view, it needs to be pointed out and taken care of. --健次(derumi)talk 17:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That's just what this article needs-- a good conspiracy theory.  It's too bad that I'm not Wayne Hoffman.  Maybe slfisher was referring to some other anonymous poster (or Texasmusician himself) who added the most recent positive quotes about Sali.  Hint:  it wasn't me.  In fact, Texasmusician admitted his negative bias when he first brought his campaign against Sali to wikipedia.  Texasmusician invited others to come up with some positive quotes about Sali on their own if they felt like it.  I originally took up Texasmusician's offer and posted some positive quotes about Sali.  However, it soon became obvious that this was simply not appropriate for wiki and I said so previously in this very discussion page.  I said the page had become an op ed piece, or war of quotations, rather than a biography.  I even suggested removing the entire section of quotations pro or con, and just leave quotes by Sali himself.  Texasmusician apparently rejected such a compromise, but someone else came in and thinned the article out considerably.  Since then Texasmusician has been the one smuggling the bias back into the article, with a smattering of positive quotes to divert some suspicion.  If someone wants to take out the Sali endorsement quotations, I'm fine with that, as I've said before.  Thanks again to Derumi for bringing some sanity to the article.   -- 66.233.250.90 19:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I am also suspicious of 66.233... in his defense however, that IP address originates from Springdale, Arkansas.  If it really is someone on the staff, then they're being very careful.  --Shadowlink1014 22:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget about WP:AFG. Perhaps he is only interested in Bill Sali and thus he only edits Sali's page? Also, Shadowlink1014, why do you say the IP originates from Springdale, Arkansas. I thought it was Kirkland, Washington. --Alexc3 (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think he's on a staff - you're right, he is probably just interested in Sali.  It's interesting now that you bring up the IP address... this website  (which is what I originally used) returns Springdale, Arkansas.  However now that you say it, I've tried the other sites and they all say Kirkland, Washington.  Huh... --Shadowlink1014 21:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, that's odd. According to my search, his ISP is Clearwire, which is, apparently, located in Kirkland, Washington (according the the Wikipedia page). I think it's likely he's in Arkansas. It doesn't really matter though. Either way, I think it's unlikely he's part of Sali's staff. Even if he is, he might actually be able to make good contributions, but it's up to him to decide that. --Alexc3 (talk) 19:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sali staff whitewashing this article?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bill Sali. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070826232856/http://sali.house.gov:80/Biography/ to http://sali.house.gov/Biography/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070702145136/http://www.govnotgod.org/cand_display.aspx?id=14 to http://www.govnotgod.org/cand_display.aspx?id=14
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150220000000/http://www.sos.idaho.gov/ELECT/results/ENR/statewide_total.html to http://www.sos.idaho.gov/ELECT/results/ENR/statewide_total.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080423084013/http://www.opencongress.org:80/roll_call/show/1737 to http://www.opencongress.org/roll_call/show/1737
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927200912/http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-oct3006-Sali_abortion.19976b1.html to http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-oct3006-Sali_abortion.19976b1.html
*Added  tag to http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/aug/10/sali_spokesman_clarifies_remarks_my_boss_is_not_a_bigot
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bill Sali. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930203255/https://election.nationaljournal.com/2006/profiles/id01_sali.htm to https://election.nationaljournal.com/2006/profiles/id01_sali.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520081247/http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s001167/key-votes/ to http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/s001167/key-votes/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070725200354/http://sali.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=64199 to http://www.sali.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=64199
*Added  tag to http://www.spokesmanreview.com/idaho/story.asp?ID=202073&page=all
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070822060601/http://www.onenewsnow.com:80/2007/08/Idaho_congressman_disturbed_by.php to http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/08/idaho_congressman_disturbed_by.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bill Sali. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070817205409/http://www.idsos.state.id.us/elect/RESULTS/2006/primary/tot_stwd.htm to http://www.idsos.state.id.us/elect/RESULTS/2006/primary/tot_stwd.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090416030919/http://www.sos.idaho.gov/elect/RESULTS/2008/Primary/tot_stwd.htm to http://www.sos.idaho.gov/elect/RESULTS/2008/Primary/tot_stwd.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/08/idaho_congressman_disturbed_by.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:22, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified