Talk:Jim Gerlach

message: Who keeps changing this entry to Lois Murphy?
:Don't know - someone who's very confused (and I'm a Murphy supporter).  Changing it back. jesup 04:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: The bit about the district being shaped for Gerlach to win may be true, but needs a citation or something.
*The first external link is a citation for that. jesup 18:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removing partisan edit.  As per Using Talk pages, Wikipedia is not a soapbox, and talk pages are not for partisan point-making (in any direction) - they're for discussion of the content of the main page.  jesup 04:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV - district shape 

message: 71.225.69.95 has made and now re-made partisan edits.  Also, the list of endorsements he's been adding is cut-and-pasted from Gerlach's campaign website, and so is also a copyright violation.  A survey of other active politician wiki pages show that lists of endorsements are generally not considered appropriate for biography pages.  (See Ed Rendell Lynn Swann, etc.)  There are also issues with his/her current edits technically (lost link to notable races).  Bio pages need to be fact-based, and avoid becoming campaign website stand-ins. jesup 11:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The anonuser has redone part of their edit (though not the copyvio portion of it).  They have not answered the objections above here or on their talk page.  I'm considering reverting their edit again, but I wish to avoid an edit war on this.  I should note that the text on Delay in question is factual and appropriately referenced, has been here without change for many months, and includes Gerlach's response to the issue (also referenced).  In response to their first edit, when reverting it I did try to retain what I could, and moved this into a subheading on fundraising along with the fundraising summary link.  jesup 04:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  partisan edits 

message: Jesup should know that the Fundraising entry is pure partisan rhetoric that is taken straight from the attack ads of Congressman Gerlach's opponent.  I suspect that Jesup is someone working for Lois Murphy's campaign.  There is no other reasonable explanation for why Jesup is so adamant about including negative attack ad info on what is supposed to be a neutral non-partisan page.  Hopefully, Jesup will stop engaging in such attacks and leave the Gerlach Bio Page be. 
Dan
:As mentioned before, you can sign your edits with four tildes (~).  The first part of "Fundraising" was a link to a non-partisan political financial reporting site.  The statement about sources is true, though I'd entertain removing it if you were to discuss the issue.  The second part (if you read the discussion above) is not taken from any ad.  As the history here shows, the text about DeLay predates any ads about the subject by at least six or seven months.  It's factual, includes the response, with citations, and has 'baked' here for close to 10 months.  If you read the information above, you will see that I disclosed months ago (when deleting pro-Murphy vandalism) that I'm a supporter of Murphy.  I monitor and occasionally work to expand both the Murphy page and this page, and I try to do so in a NPOV manner.  I've deleted vandalism, biased (anti-Gerlach and pro-Gerlach) information here on multiple occasions. I do think it may make sense to create a 6th-District Campaign race for information like this, though the fact that he took money from DeLay's PAC extends back to his first federal race, and he was one of the largest recipients, and one of the few not to return/donate it. I asked multiple times for you to discuss things here before repeating your deletes, and you have for the 5th time deleted it without discussion first.  I'm going to ask for dispute resolution to try to resolve this.  jesup 02:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: 71.225.68.43 and 71.225.69.95 (aka 'Dan') are apparently the same user given their comments (Comcast DHCP address).  jesup 02:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jesup stop your Partisan entries 

message: Jesup has falsely accused me twice of a copyright violation.  According to 
Jesup, I took a statement concerning endorsements from a Gerlach Webpage and added it to the Gerlach Wikipedia Bio. Jesup has no basis for this erroneous claim.  The statement in question was: "Numerous fire fighter, law enforcement, humanitarian and labor organizations have endorsed Congressman Jime Gerlach in 2006.  Among the groups that have publicly announced their support for Jim Gerlach are: ....[names of various labor groups, etc.]."   This statement is my own work product and I defy Jesup to find that statement on any Gerlach Webpage.
In addition to making up copyright violation claims, Jesup also feigns false piety by claiming that endorsements have no place on a Bio page because, Bio pages are supposed to be non-partisan and neutral.  Jesup, however, has no problem repeatedly adding a negative statement on the Gerlach Bio Page concerning Fundraising.  This Fundraising statement is based on a claim that appears in attack ads aired by Congressman Gerlach's opponent.  
I fail to see how listing the names of groups that have come out and publicly endorsed a candidate can be deemed partian and inappropriate for a Bio page, but making a negative statement about one of the candidate's fundraising sources is not.  Jesup can't have it both ways.  
So if Jesup truly seeks to achieve the spirit of non-partisan objectivity on this Bio Page, then Jesup should leave out the partisan fundraising statements.
Dan
:Dan
:The copyvio portion of your edit was the cut-and-pasted list of groups, not the statement that preceded it.  I compared it to the list on Gerlach's campaign page, and it was identical to Gerlach's endorsement list (including the order and wording).  Note: since then several more endorsements have been added.  If you didn't cut-and-paste it, I'm sorry, but it seems unlikely the exact wording and order would occur otherwise.  (Where did you get the list from if not there?)Before deleting the list of endorsements, I surveyed other politician's bio pages; I couldn't find any that list endorsements, even far more extensive and higher profile.  That isn't to say they might not exist, but they probably don't belong in a bio.  You could make an argument for including them (for both sides) on a Campaign page, which I'm considering creating (similar to how one was created for the 7th district (Weldon-Sestak)).The second time I deleted it you had messed up the page (broken formatting, etc), and you had refused (or didn't know how to) discuss the issue.  jesup 02:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jesup False Copyright Claim 

message: Hi!
I hail from WP:3O.  I noticed you're having a bit of a dispute.
I took a look at the article history and the section in question (fundraising), which was removed again today.  The fundraising section appears to be well-sourced and is about a notable event in Mr. Gerlach's 2006 campaign.  Therefore, I would point Dan to several policies:
*WP:NPOV - all sides of an issue or person must be described in relevant articles, even if they're unflattering: hence the reason Mel Gibson's article has a section about his drunk driving.
*WP:V - everything in an article must be verifiable by WP:RS.  If a section is verifiable and relevant as well as important to the article, it should not be removed.  This constitutes vandalism and "POV-pushing."
If you believe that the sources used in the fundraising section of the article are not reliable, please leave me a message here or on my talk page and I'll take a closer look.  My first and second impressions, however, are that they are in fact reliable.  If they are not (as a neutral third party, I will investigate any concerns), they can be replaced by more reliable sources.  In this case, the task of finding more reliable sources will be Jesup's responsibility. Srose (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I am trying very hard to be considerate to Dan, who is a new editor here it appears.  I will be restoring the fundraising section for now.  Dan, if you still object, please discuss this with Srose(talk) and if you think there's still a case for removal, rewording or refining the citations, please make it here and we'll discuss it.  I may still look to create a 6th District Campaign page, in which case it would move there.  jesup 18:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll probably look at the 7th, thanks.  As for PACs, you have a good point - more context would help.  (Note that there is some context already, in that the DeLay thing is also related to PACs, but that's not strong enough a connection).  I edited it to provide a bit more context and a neutralizing comment on incumbents (for which I need to dig up a reference (I've seen it before), which may well also be on opensecrets).  (Note how Sholom presented an issue of possible POV here and got it addressed.) jesup 19:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinion 

message: As you can see, the campaign page has been created (I was getting sleepy by the end, and John Broughton has added some helpful edits, both here and on the Murphy page).  I'll be continuing to update stuff here in the aftermath of the split.  Note that there will still be a 2006 Campaign heading and a brief description of the campaign there.  I will probably re-add the information on DeLay, but probably not under the 2006 Campaign section - I'll probably create a separate section (as it is in many but not all other ARMPAC beneficiaries).  jesup 21:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 Campaign page created 

message: Did he win? Last I looked it was extremely close. --71.224.19.29 17:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Pennsylvania 6th Congressional District election, 2006 jesup 17:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Well? 

message: I dispute the factual basis of Gerlach's early career because I interned for him back in 1992 while I was in high school, and I distinctly remember that he worked for Lamb, Windle, McErlane in West Chester, Pa., prior to his 1990 election against fmr. State Rep. Sam Morris.--FidesetRatio 22:14, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, find a WP:RS that states so and make the edit.  You could just make the edit if you're pretty sure it's independently verifiable, but if challenged you'll need to back it up.  Note that the current early career isn't <ref>ed anyways.  jesup 22:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a Daily Local News article that I found on microfilm in the library. It's so old that it's not on the Internet. How should I cite it?--FidesetRatio 22:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem; just cite it with Foo T. Bar, Daily Local News, April 1, 2010,.  There are actually better ways to cite paper articles with , but I don't know them off-the-cuff.  jesup 23:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops - include the article title as well, and source (microfilm).  jesup 23:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you wouldn't mind, I have the citation posted on the main page, could you reformat the Mike Rellahan article for me so it is Wikified.
Thanks.--FidesetRatio 01:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The Jim Gerlach I knew 15 years ago was a staunch environmentalist whose thinking impressed upon my 17-year-old brain. His stance for preserving open space in Chester County is under-recognized now that he's a congressman. I knew him better when he was a state legislator, but I really haven't talked to him much in several years.--FidesetRatio 22:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the televised debate, Lois Murphy praised his work in the PA Senate on Open Space; one of the few questions where they did (of course, most questions were oriented at things that were campaign issues).  Of course, no one saw it... jesup 23:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If it wasn't for Jim Gerlach's work Pennsylvania municipalities would have a much harder time preserving open space because his work made it easier for townships to work together. I'm not saying this as a partisan, but as someone who works closely with Chester County municipalities. I have serious differences with my old acquaintance.--FidesetRatio 00:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Early career

message: The anonymous editor's addition of uncited material about eminent domain in Ardmore clearly had a marginal impact on the election, considering Murphy trounced Gerlach in the Montgomery County portion of the district. Eminent domain in Ardmore had no impact in Chester, Berks or Lehigh counties. Additionally, mentioning that Jim Gerlach loosened his tie at an event is irrelevant.
--FidesetRatio 21:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed (you beat me to adding a comment).  That issue could end up in there if he's made it a significant position, backed up by WP:RS.  As for the election, I haven't seen a WP:RS that said it was a major factor.  Eminent domain is an issue in Ardmore from what I know, but I'm don't think it reaches a level for inclusion in a bio.  If it was significant in the campaign, it should go there, probably not in the bio, unless he does something significant about it at the federal level (which means more than just introduce a bill).  As for tie-loosening... not appropriate, I agree.  :-)  jesup 21:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's about as relevant as including Gerlach's arguing with me over how great the first George Bush was or how the Penguins would beat the Chicago Blackhawks in the 1992 Stanley Cup. LOL--FidesetRatio 21:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gerlach's opposition to eminent domain

message: Note that John changed the name of the 2006 campaign page to be lower-case to match all the other 2006 campaign pages.  So currently the Main article link hits a redirect.  jesup 05:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 campaign page name 

message: Deleted outdated material. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.225.108.129 (talk) 02:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating Page 

message: I removed a edit that stated "His biographies show no record of military service."  Is his military service, or lack thereof in dispute?  If it is, we need a reference.  If not, I don't see the purpose of this oddly worded line.  It is like saying, "his biographies show no record of spousal abuse", or "his biographies show no record of his conversion to Buddhism". There is no record because the thing didn't happen, and wouldn't necessarily be expected to happen. Npeters22 (talk) 18:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: No Military Service

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Jim Gerlach. 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/20140108232521/http://riponadvance.com/news/gerlach-wont-seek-reelection/6140 to http://riponadvance.com/news/gerlach-wont-seek-reelection/6140
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130927213507/http://riponadvance.com/news/house-seeks-tax-incentive-for-land-conservation-donations/4612 to http://riponadvance.com/news/house-seeks-tax-incentive-for-land-conservation-donations/4612
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120901132119/http://dsf.chesco.org/election/lib/election/results/cumf.htm to http://dsf.chesco.org/election/lib/election/results/cumf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120427125121/http://www.pottsmerc.com/articles/2009/02/06/news/srv0000004646303.txt to http://www.pottsmerc.com/articles/2009/02/06/news/srv0000004646303.txt
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090508112157/http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/05/04/news/local_state/doc49fecae069f10319834499.txt to http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/05/04/news/local_state/doc49fecae069f10319834499.txt
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141205200445/http://gerlach.house.gov/biography/extendedbiography.htm to http://gerlach.house.gov/biography/extendedbiography.htm
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) 03:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified