Talk:Thomas Kean Jr.

message: The following sentence was removed from the main article: "He has been accused of being a Republican In Name Only (RINO) by conservatives."
While the charge is out there, the us of a post to a blog to support the statement is questionable. A search of Google News was unsuccessful in identifying a more mainstream source. Please reinsert with an appropriate link. Alansohn 16:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: RINO

message: Regarding the following passage:
"There has been much speculation that Kean will drop out of the race because of heavy conservative opposition in relatiation for his father's role on the 9/11 Commission, which was criticized by some conservatives..."
This seems to be highly likely to be POV (or maybe the author's wishful thinking) and also UNSOURCED.
If after the press conference on March 27, Kean is still in the race, then let's take the passage out.
69.39.172.90 09:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Highly questionable and unsourced claim

message: Hi Abe.  You're obviously an experienced Wikipedia user.  You are no doubt familiar with the concept of original research, and how it is highly discouraged here.  You have repeatedly added material of original research to the Thomas Kean Jr. page today.  I removed this material because you did not provide a source.  You reverted this change, and tried to use Wikipedia as a source.  The pages you linked to also do not cite their source.  This is clearly a case of original research.  I must ask that you remove this material until you can provide a reputable source for these facts.  I am not disagreeing with the facts, or claiming that they are in any way incorrect or falsified.  I just want a reputable, verifiable source.
Furthermore, I fail to see the significance of the median income value of these districts.  It appears out of context and does not relate to the paragraph.
: Thank you for finally adding the proper sources.
: They were already present in the wiki links.  Review WP:Cite.  And find another editor to stalk.  Abe Froman 23:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Median Income Data 

message: Please note that there is an article specifically for this campaign/race/election.  The section on the election in the Thomas Kean Jr. article (and in the Menendez article, which I've already changed) should be a BRIEF summary of the race; interested readers can then go to the main article.  Among other things, this means that there should only be ONE place to get into discussions about text related to campaign events, rather than THREE places (Kean, Menendez, and election article).
I'd welcome someone else moving most of the campaign text out of this article (I suspect that most of it is already in the campaign article); if no one else does it in a day or so, I will.  John Broughton 12:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 Senate campaign 

message: Normally I'd just revert changes by a new user that are so blatantly POV (in favor of Kean and against Menendez), but given the number of edits that Atarpatel did, I'm hoping that he/she might be willing to abide by wikipedia rules in doing edits in the future.  So some comments:
* If you don't explain (using edit summaries) what you're doing, people are likely to be more suspicious that you aren't following wikipedia guidelines.
* If you delete five out of eight references, and two out of six external links, as you did, you've automatically lost any credibility that you might have for the edits you've done.  (Exception: spamlinks, which, obviously, these were not.)
* The purpose of PREVIEW is to look at your work before you finalize it.  If you'd done that, you might have noticed that you had SEVEN cases of starting a reference (with a ), but failing to close it (with a ).  Also, you need a "References" section and a tag for references to appear.  
* Don't assume that you can make a lot of changes to an article that biases it significantly and still not have anyone notice.  Or that you know enough about wikipedia to prevail in any ensuing edit war.  John Broughton 18:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's remember that this is a new user and not be quite so brutal. I agree with you that these changes completely undo what is a pretty decent, weel-documented article. As a new user, Atarpatel is unlikely to view the discussion here or read the edit summaries you and i have entered. I'd strongly suggest toning down the rhetoric and adding this to the user's talk page, which would show up on top of a page and be more likely to be clicked on and read. Alansohn 20:03, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I apologize for having deleted some of your edits that were mixed in with changes by Atarpatel; I should have checked.  As for Atarpatel, I withhold judgment about whether he was acting in good faith - I've never seen that kind of a butcher job by anyone other than someone uninterested in any kind of reasonable discussion - while admitting that I was irritated when I posted the above.  John Broughton 18:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes by Atarpatel 

message: While the article states that Kean opposes the administration's Social Security plan, I believe it needs to be made more specific.  Senator Menendez claims otherwise, and the truth - from the article cited here - seems to be a little of both.  Kean appears to support a slightly less drastic version of the administration plan - putting 2% into private accounts instead of 4% - which may not be the biggest distinction in the world, but I believe it's worth expanding upon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.52.215.100 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 9 October 2006
:The citations given in the article do not support (in fact, contradict) the blanket statement that he opposes privatization.  I agree with you that some elaboration will be necessary to present his position accurately and neutrally. JamesMLane t c 19:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Social Security

message: This whole section reads like it was written by a member of his staff or something.  What gives?  98.168.192.162 (talk) 02:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: State Senate Section

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Thomas Kean Jr.. 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/20170927121504/http://ga0.org/freedom_action/alert-description.tcl?alert_id=2000334 to http://ga0.org/freedom_action/alert-description.tcl?alert_id=2000334
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071126194306/http://www.state.nj.us/lps/elections/2006results/06generalelection/2006_official-senate_tallies.pdf to http://www.state.nj.us/lps/elections/2006results/06generalelection/2006_official-senate_tallies.pdf
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) 08:03, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion