Talk:Paul H. O'Neill

message: One part of this article says that "he resigned in December 2002", another part says "led to his dismissal in 2003". Which is it? Did he resign, or was he fired? Was it in 2002, or 2003? --Mprudhom 16:30, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: He officially resigned, but was asked to do so. I think he submitted his resignition in 2002, but did not leave his post until 2003. --Jiang 01:56, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: For anyone who bothers to read the news, it should be obvious. The first paragraph mentions "January 2004" and links to it as when he became a critic, and the last couple paragraphs explain this criticism. --Jiang 05:16, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Assume no such things in readers. Specific context is always needed for any news item. Simply list what day his book was published or what day the Bush Admin counter-attacked. I'm well-aware of the issue and the news about it - but teaching people how to correctly list things on the Main Page is my concern right now - fixing it for them will not teach them as well as them doing it themselves. --mav—Preceding undated comment added by Mav (talk) • contribs) 05:52, 14 January 2004 (UTC)

text: LOL On January 12, 2004 CBS reported... There is your date. There is also an earlier CBS article (the 10th). --mav—Preceding undated comment added by Mav (talk) • contribs) 06:01, 14 January 2004 (UTC)

text: Without knowing when and where the info is reported, then how can we find out if the un-named source is telling the truth? When he was interviewed on 60 Minutes is a very important piece of information that should be in the article. That would establish all the context the reader would need. --mav—Preceding undated comment added by Mav (talk) • contribs) 07:04, 14 January 2004 (UTC)

text: It's a bad idea to be self-referential and talk about wikipedia. That's what's dopey. You are welcome to incorporate your post (minus the wikipedia part) into the relevant paragraph where his comments about being in a "room full of deaf people" are discussed - not before that paragraph. --Jiang 23:57, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: point taken  - hope this is better - can't find my copy of the book just now but will update with page references later.64.185.10.156 14:10, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe the article Paul O'Neill should be for the disambiguation page, because two Paul O'Neill's, this one and the baseball player of the same name are equally deserving of the main article.  However, since their only can be one, it should be a disambiguation page linking to both of them as well as others with the same name. Milchama 01:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Per discussion that can now be found at Talk:Paul O'Neill, I moved this page to Paul O'Neill (cabinet member).  If a better name arises, it should be easy enough to fix.  More important now is dealing with all the incoming links at Paul O'Neill. -GTBacchus(talk) 09:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: What Economic School of thought does O'Neill fit into?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.249.51 (talk) 09:15, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic School? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Paul O'Neill (politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060213041454/http://prhi.org:80/ppc.cfm to http://www.prhi.org/ppc.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified