Talk:Mitt Romney/Archive 2

message: I edited the positions section to reflect the fact that Mitt Romney routinely flip flops and that his true positions, if in fact he holds any, are unknown.
:I won't comment on flip flopping but we do need more transcripts of his speeches. His oratory style lingers on stories of people he has met and vague statements advocating morality without much policy to meet those ends. We need to make a list of his speeches and their transcripts to fully document his policy promotions. I think after that is accomplished the cognitive dissonance between editors of this article will decrease dramatically.GrEp 23:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here are his list of speeches: http://www.mittromney.com/News/Speeches/index. Here is my list of his speeches: http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Speeches  myclob 12:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Positions 

message: That Picture is terrible.
*I don't agree. It may not be the best picture, but there are articles that don't have any pictures. Those should attract more focus. Also, please sign your comments!!! - Libertyville 20:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs better picture 

message: == In-state tuition bill ==
Someone editing from an IP address has been reverting my recent edit on the In-state tuition section. I'm up to two reverts, so I wanted others to weigh in. According to the source article in the Boston Globe the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation (according to the Globe a non-partisan, non-profit group that did not issue an opinion on the bill) conducted a study that showed that there would be a net gain to MA taxpayers if the bill were to become law. The article includes a quote from a group that opposed the bill (thus, making it partisan in this case): "Robert Casimiro -- who heads the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform, which opposes the bill -- disputed the conclusions and said he believes that the arrival of hundreds of undocumented immigrant students would have plenty of costs for the state, both at instititions of higher education and in general. "The classes I have attended [at Massasoit Community College] are filled to capacity; they would have to open new classes, and that costs money,"" Note the words "I believe." He did not offer any evidence to challenge the conclusions of the study.
My concerns with the edits by 65.96.5.43 are as follows:
* 65.96.5.43 writes that the Mass Taxpayer Foundation "speculated" their conclusions. I disagree. They carried out a study based on several data sets. I think it is more accurate to say that they "found" or "concluded."
* 65.96.5.43 writes that the Mass Coalition for Immigrant Reform "refuted" the other group's findings. However, as noted above, Casimiro only offered a few opinions as to why he believed the study to be wrong. He did not offer any evidence or prove that the report was wrong (see definition for refute).
Thanks.--Notmyrealname 03:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, newspapers like to quote from people on every side of an issue. But this is not a newspaper article. Casimiro has a reaction to the report. His group didn't put out a detailed study challenging the findings. He just offered an opinion. It seems that the Mass Taxpayer Foundation's report was a serious piece of research based on the experiences of the nine other states that have similar laws. I think there's a qualitative issue here. More importantly, Romney didn't dispute the report.--Notmyrealname 06:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Romney did dispute the findings of the report. He belives that the legislation would cost the state 15 million, the group though it would bring 5 million to the state. The report doesn't even consider other costs beyond education (i.e. health costs and public safety costs). You could make an argument that there is a "qualitative issue" with a study that doesn't take into account the entire secenario associated with the legislation. I am not going to have that debate on this page, but it is worth noting that others disagree with the conclusions. The groups report is after all an educated guess of the real effects of the legislation. Since the study's findings are not facts, but rather opinon/analysis, its worth noting the opinion/analysis of others on the study -- especially those of groups that are mentioned in the same source.--Waverider5 02:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the article, Romney hadn't read the report. I'm not sure how having illegal immigrants pay the in-state tuition rate would increase health and public safety costs. But, as you say, that is a debate for another time, and anyway, there should be no original research on Wikipedia in any case. The point is that Romney put forward an estimate (presumably based on research and a studies) of a $15 million cost, and MTF released a study forecasting a $5 million gain. I think that this is fair and balanced. There is no need to put out opinions of groups that haven't done serious studies. If we wanted to go down this path we could get quotes from a zillion advocacy groups on both sides of the issue. The Casimiro's quote in the source is of a different order of quality than that of the study.Notmyrealname 05:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm.... interesting debate taking place on this one. Its always intersting see different perspectives on issues. Not sure its our place to discredit either the study that the group produced or the other group. Since they were both quoted in a Boston Globe article, I will gve them the benifit of the doubt and call them both credable. Its important to show that Romney's analysis is disputed (by the study), but isnt it also wise to show that the study is also disputed? Nobody really knows what the cost/gain of this plan would be since it never happened. Neither side has a crystal ball.--Cliffhanger7 03:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Education

message: Someone editing from an IP address has been reverting my recent edit on the In-state tuition section. I'm up to two reverts, so I wanted others to weigh in. According to the source article in the Boston Globe the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation (according to the Globe a non-partisan, non-profit group that did not issue an opinion on the bill) conducted a study that showed that there would be a net gain to MA taxpayers if the bill were to become law. The article includes a quote from a group that opposed the bill (thus, making it partisan in this case): "Robert Casimiro -- who heads the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform, which opposes the bill -- disputed the conclusions and said he believes that the arrival of hundreds of undocumented immigrant students would have plenty of costs for the state, both at instititions of higher education and in general. "The classes I have attended [at Massasoit Community College] are filled to capacity; they would have to open new classes, and that costs money,"" Note the words "I believe." He did not offer any evidence to challenge the conclusions of the study.
My concerns with the edits by 65.96.5.43 are as follows:
* 65.96.5.43 writes that the Mass Taxpayer Foundation "speculated" their conclusions. I disagree. They carried out a study based on several data sets. I think it is more accurate to say that they "found" or "concluded."
* 65.96.5.43 writes that the Mass Coalition for Immigrant Reform "refuted" the other group's findings. However, as noted above, Casimiro only offered a few opinions as to why he believed the study to be wrong. He did not offer any evidence or prove that the report was wrong (see definition for refute).
Thanks.--Notmyrealname 03:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, newspapers like to quote from people on every side of an issue. But this is not a newspaper article. Casimiro has a reaction to the report. His group didn't put out a detailed study challenging the findings. He just offered an opinion. It seems that the Mass Taxpayer Foundation's report was a serious piece of research based on the experiences of the nine other states that have similar laws. I think there's a qualitative issue here. More importantly, Romney didn't dispute the report.--Notmyrealname 06:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Romney did dispute the findings of the report. He belives that the legislation would cost the state 15 million, the group though it would bring 5 million to the state. The report doesn't even consider other costs beyond education (i.e. health costs and public safety costs). You could make an argument that there is a "qualitative issue" with a study that doesn't take into account the entire secenario associated with the legislation. I am not going to have that debate on this page, but it is worth noting that others disagree with the conclusions. The groups report is after all an educated guess of the real effects of the legislation. Since the study's findings are not facts, but rather opinon/analysis, its worth noting the opinion/analysis of others on the study -- especially those of groups that are mentioned in the same source.--Waverider5 02:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the article, Romney hadn't read the report. I'm not sure how having illegal immigrants pay the in-state tuition rate would increase health and public safety costs. But, as you say, that is a debate for another time, and anyway, there should be no original research on Wikipedia in any case. The point is that Romney put forward an estimate (presumably based on research and a studies) of a $15 million cost, and MTF released a study forecasting a $5 million gain. I think that this is fair and balanced. There is no need to put out opinions of groups that haven't done serious studies. If we wanted to go down this path we could get quotes from a zillion advocacy groups on both sides of the issue. The Casimiro's quote in the source is of a different order of quality than that of the study.Notmyrealname 05:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmmm.... interesting debate taking place on this one. Its always intersting see different perspectives on issues. Not sure its our place to discredit either the study that the group produced or the other group. Since they were both quoted in a Boston Globe article, I will gve them the benifit of the doubt and call them both credable. Its important to show that Romney's analysis is disputed (by the study), but isnt it also wise to show that the study is also disputed? Nobody really knows what the cost/gain of this plan would be since it never happened. Neither side has a crystal ball.--Cliffhanger7 03:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-state tuition bill 

message: "Romney served for 30 months as a Mormon missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in France."  myclob 23:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this belong in "education" 

message: This section needs to be revamped. More than half of the section is related to initiatives that he proposed but that were never passed, and more space is taken up with his opinions about national policies that he can do nothing about. The relevant info are the metrics that show performance of education in the state during his tenure. Is it necessary to have a picture of him touting the $100 laptop proposal if nothing ever came of it? The casual reader would likely get the impression that this is something that actually happened.Notmyrealname 18:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education Initiatives 

message: "He also serves as the chairman of the Republican Governors Association and honorary chairman of the Commonwealth Political Action Committee.[2]"
Does anyone care? I mean this is his pack, and so I would assume he serves as charman...
I propose, if you agree, you just remove... That's how it should always work. One person proposes, and another person seconds it, by romoving it... A third person can change it back, if they don't like it, unless you make a good argument here, to stop the 2nd person from doing it...
myclob 23:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it should read "gained national attention." I don't think many people cared when he lost to Kennedy by 17 points, even if he had good poll numbers a few months before the election. And he didn't even run for office again for another 8 years. I had never heard of him before he became Governor, but the 2002 Olympics were an international scandal, and he keep them from going down in disgrace, so I guess it is appropriate to say that this the thing that got him noticed. I disagree with Michael16G that Bain should come before the RGA. It's a national political post, although it hasn't gone so well lately. George Bush made his money in baseball, but who cares?--Notmyrealname 18:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Just read the intro over again. Should definitely mention Bain & Co. someplace here.Notmyrealname 19:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree with this one. Intro should have his buisness expierence. He has spent more time at Bain Capital and Bain & Company than he has as governor and at the olympics combined.--Waverider5 02:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  and honorary chairman of the Commonwealth Political Action Committee. 

message: "At BCG Romney worked with recent MIT graduate and future Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[5]"
This is under business, but does not really mean anything to Romney's business career. Take it out and put it under trivia or somewhere else. myclob 23:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with myclob. It has nothing to do with his business career. Belongs either in a trivia section or a "people he met who later became famous" section. Notmyrealname 18:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It is an interesting fact but not really relevent to business. I like the idea of creating a trivia section and putting facts like this and others in it.--24.218.109.71 01:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the trivia idea but is there anything else to put in this section? We shouldn't create a trivia category for one fact. Any ideas for other trivia items?--Waverider5 02:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Netanyahu item needs some dates and other info to make any sense (wasn't Romney working as an intern?). "Recent MIT grad" doesn't make sense without a date.Notmyrealname 20:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone took away my triva section :(  I have some more...Romney was named "Mitt" after a Chicago Bears quarterback of the same name... http://www.nationalreview.com/miller/miller200506031216.asp myclob 22:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put this under trivia or somewhere else... 

message: I was surprised to read no mention of Gov. Romney serving his country in the armed forces. Is this the case, or is it left out? He seems the age that he would have qualified for the draft, or could have enlisted for active service during he Vietnam war. Any info on this subject?  22:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Romney ever serve in the armed forces?

message: So why is this continually added back?  I have to ask the relevance of mentioning he didn't, because it seems like it's being added to make some sort of point, which isn't really thought of highly. --badlydrawnjeff talk 03:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The continued edit war

message: First it was "Mormon", then  it was "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", then it was "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)" and now it's "Christian (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".
Christian is unncessary and doesn't follow the standard on other articles; hardly any other bios have Christian and then the denomination in brackets.  Christian is inferred by listing a Christian denomination.  I'm reverting Mitt's back to "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)". Tell me what you think. Antley 20:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the term Mormon has a negative connotation to it, and therefore shouldn't be used.  I'm not too concerned about using Christian as part of the description, but there should be consistency.  New England (C) (H) 19:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the term "Mormon" is regularly used quite neutrally throughout the mainstream press, and there's no negative connotation that I, a Mormon myself, read into such use of the term.  I think Antley's suggestion above is best: full name of the church, with "Mormon" in parentheses following. alanyst /talk/ 20:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing that you are a Mormon, I have to agree with you.  New England (C) (H) 20:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also Mormon and don't see any negative connotations with it.Joseph Antley 04:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitt's religion 

message: Does this really belong as the 2nd sentense in his biography? Is this more important than who his dad is? Do we mention any other 2008 presidential candidates great-great grandfather's? 
It is a fact that a good percentage of people in America would not support a Mormon president. And so it would make sense, of enemies of Romney's to beat it over our heads over and over again that Romney is a a Mormon. I'm not saying that we should ignore it, but how many times does Joseph Lieberman's article mention that he is Jewish? Lets pretend to be fair.
myclob 00:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The question isn't weather or not the american public will find out mitt romney had a "famous" mormon ansestor. Every single person on this planet has a famous "great-great grandfather". With the whole degrees of seperation... The question is weather it belongs in the 2nd sentense of his biography. I didn't explain myself very well with the Joseph Liberman thing. I wasn't asking weather or not his article mentions his Jewish ancestors, I was asking how many times his article mentions that he is Jewish... I think it is rediculous to not think that 5 references to Romney's religion in the first 5 paragraphs is rediculous...70.131.37.238 11:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you are mistaken, every person on the planet does not have a famous great great grandfather, not by a mile, so the pith of your comment doesn't hold at all. Wholly aside from that, a strong genealogical argument can be made that virtually every person of western European ancestry is a great... granchild of Charlemagne. Gwen Gale 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, Parley P. Pratt is a household name within the Mormon community, but I don't think that Romney's relation is particularly relevant in this context, at least not in the lead paragraph.  However, in regard to him being a practicing Latter-Day Saint, that is what is going to be driving many people to this page at this particular time.  Mitt Romney's devotion to a religion with very strict precepts raises the valid concern among voters of, "If elected, could his commitment to his faith present a conflict of interest?"  They're going to be coming to sites like this hoping to find the answer.  I'm not saying we should try to answer that question here, but we'd be doing readers a disservice if we tried to say that in the interest of fairness we won't be mentioning his religion at all.  --Atomicskier 17:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The reference is not in the lead paragraph, it's in a paragraph describing his family. Gwen Gale 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know where it is.  I meant that it may not be relevant enough to lead his bio.  But the more I think about it I guess there's nothing wrong with mentioning it.  Those who don't know or care who PPP is will just read past it.  The main point that I wanted to make is that I think his personal devotion to the LDS church is highly relevant to our general audience, more so than his relation to Pratt. --Atomicskier 18:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "great great grandson of Latter-day Saint leader and apostle Parley P. Pratt 

message: The Associated Press just ran a piece called Romney family tree has polygamy branch. This is a well documented fact, and is not disputed by Mitt or anyone else. Mitt often jokes about polygamy. Mitt's father was born in Mexico as a result of his family having to flee the country because of their polygamy. Mitt has a lot of relatives as a result of this. I don't think this should necessarily have an entire section, but there really should be some mention of this, as there has been in the mainstream press across the ideological spectrum. Notmyrealname 02:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His great great grandfather Parley P. Pratt is a noted early LDS leader. I've added a reference to this with a cite to the AP article. Any notable ancestors are relevant biographically, the polygamy of some of those ancestors could also be, but I have not mentioned the latter. The murder of Parley Pratt is often cited as a contributing cause of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Gwen Gale 02:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mention of a relative separated by four generations is not relevant enough for mention in the first sentence of his bio.  The only reason for placing this is to have the word "polygamy" in the footnote.  I'm sure lots of Mormons are decendent from other Mormons, but one doesn't find this same sort of treatment on every famous Mormon's biography. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.251.236.130 (talk) 02:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: You're mistaken. The title of the AP article is unrelated to the edit. He's a candidate for president of the US. PP is an historically notable person. The connection is notable. Gwen Gale 02:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the title is unrelated, then find a source for their relation somewhere other than a piece primarily about polygamy.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.251.236.130 (talk) 05:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I invite you to find a replacement source with a title more fitting to your needs. Gwen Gale 12:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Sentence removed. Do not remove entire sections in future please. - RoyBoy 800 22:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There is already a section directed to this issue in the article about Romney's presidential campaign.  I am moving this subject matter over to that article because it is wholly about his campaign. Tommysnow 06:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I think each of the above-points needs to be responded to before this subject matter is put back in the article. Askme1 19:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually disagree; I believe the religion section does belong (perhaps in a condensed form) in the Romney bio article rather than on the presidential campaign page.  I came to the article interested in that aspect and found nothing besides one sentence.  I don't think it should concentrate on the polls and views, etc. that are included in that article in relation to the presidential campaign paragraph, but I'm reading a Slate article linked to in this biography that says the Romney family is one of Mormonism's "elite" families... and this biography itself says that Mr. Marriott was Romney's father's best friend!  This sort of information is interesting and should be further explored in this article.  People are going to be interested and he has said many times that it is an important aspect of his life, so why would that be excised from a biography of him?--Gloriamarie 18:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miles Romney's polygamy revisited 

message: I deleted the "trivia" section in order to make the article conform with the guideline Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles.  If any of the information in that section is not trivia, please add it to the appropriate section.  Fagles 15:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia section

message: ...Barak Obama's article is featured, and I don't see that it is better than this article...myclob 00:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How much more work needs to be done, until we can re-nominate this... 

message: I am trying to update the links so they conform with wiki style sheets, and am having problems with this link...
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/02/23/romneys_stance_on_civil_unions_draws_fire/?page=2
The link comes after this statement:
Romney told the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts (a Republican gay-rights group) that he did not support same-sex marriage or civil unions, but would fight discrimination against gays and lesbians.
The link has nothing to do with 2002, Log Cabin Republicans, or the "fight discrimination against gays and lesbians"
:The link should be to page 1 of that story, here, which says: "Yesterday the Log Cabin Republicans sharply rebuked the Massachusetts governor, saying his remarks indicate he is backsliding on his 2002 campaign commitment to support some benefits for gay couples."  I'll fix it now. schi talk 03:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinks... I don't like linking to the Boston Globe, because if you visit there site more than a few times, they will block you unless you pay them...myclob 19:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, access is free. You just have to sign up for an account, but you can give any real or imagined info you'd like (just as you can with a Wikipedia account).Notmyrealname 19:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating links... 

message: # 78 does not link to this article:
Rimer, Sara. "Perfect Anti-Kennedy' Opposes the Senator." The New York Times, October 25, 1994.myclob 18:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because, since it's from 1994, it doesn't have free online access at NYTimes.com. schi talk 20:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  why doesn't #78 link? 

message: I left it in, but:
*Massachusetts Press Releases
doesn't look official to me. Flatterworld 04:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to other editors of the Mitt Romney page, the press releases were taken from the Romney's Governor's of  Massachsetts state government web pages. The creator of that site's page, (http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Press Releases} was concerned that they would be deleted with the change in Massachusetts administrations. I have not checked to see if that concern came to be a reality. Probably the description for the resource should be changed. -- Yellowdesk 21:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved it from the "official" links to the list of "databases," since it seems to be an UNofficial database of official press releases.  Fagles 16:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links - "official" 

message: Some cites to sources/articles that should be incorporated into the article later: (feel free to add your own too schi talk 20:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research resources 

message: == ”Reads like campaign literature” ==
This article reads like campaign literature.  Tuviya 19:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure about Bob Taft, but perhaps this article should be more in line with the McCain and Clinton articles you link to. Ie, have a "political views" section, followed by a "Controversies" section. Not the "Here are the great things Romney did while Governor" section we seem to have here. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Whether or not these "official" images are appropriate, they don't need to be super-sized. IMO, the very fact that they're from his official website presents problems, since they probably are copyright protected, and free alternatives are quite easy to obtain. (not to mention that if they're part of his official site's image/pr, they're staged & cropped in a certain way to communicate a certain image, etc). --ZimZalaBim (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: D. M. Arney, M.A. Neutrality Project 05:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no problem with that.Notmyrealname 18:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: If anyone has no objections, I'll move the tag today (the 11th). Chupper 14:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegations of Bias

message: This article reads like campaign literature.  Tuviya 19:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure about Bob Taft, but perhaps this article should be more in line with the McCain and Clinton articles you link to. Ie, have a "political views" section, followed by a "Controversies" section. Not the "Here are the great things Romney did while Governor" section we seem to have here. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Whether or not these "official" images are appropriate, they don't need to be super-sized. IMO, the very fact that they're from his official website presents problems, since they probably are copyright protected, and free alternatives are quite easy to obtain. (not to mention that if they're part of his official site's image/pr, they're staged & cropped in a certain way to communicate a certain image, etc). --ZimZalaBim (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ”Reads like campaign literature” 

message: I have added a POV tag to this article due to a report on the Wikipedia Neutrality Project.  Please discuss the POV problems here, and please do not remove the tags until the issues have been resolved, and when you do, please leave a note on the WNP request on it so we know to close the request.
The rationale for the report which was filed is as follows:
On the behalf of the Wikipedia Neutrality Project, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 22:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: D. M. Arney, M.A. Neutrality Project 05:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no problem with that.Notmyrealname 18:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: If anyone has no objections, I'll move the tag today (the 11th). Chupper 14:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: The quote ("Like me, the great majority of Americans wish both to preserve the traditional definition of marriage and to oppose bias and intolerance directed towards gays and lesbians") the article attributes to an interview, with a link to this National Review article, does not seem to be an interview.  The National Review article sounds to me like he's giving a speech.  I tried to Google around and found a few other articles/blog posts that also called it an interview, but I also found this Christian Coalition page that said it was from his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  I searched the Senate Judiciary Committee's website and could only find this testimony by Romney.  Any ideas?  I could be wrong, it might have been an interview, but it certainly didn't sound like one to me. I suppose it isn't super-critical that we properly characterize the source of the quote, but I thought would provide an explanation for why I removed the "interview" characterization. schi talk 01:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll find some of those single-purpose accounts are remarkably quick in defending the article from "outsider" views, whether editors of the article, or reviewers.  See for example the first peer review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Mitt Romney. --  Yellowdesk 04:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Same-sex marriage interview

message: Wow - a whole lot of apparent single purpose accounts have sprung up editing here: 
*
*
*
*
*
*
*...
Its like this guy is running for President or something.... --ZimZalaBim (talk) 04:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll find some of those single-purpose accounts are remarkably quick in defending the article from "outsider" views, whether editors of the article, or reviewers.  See for example the first peer review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Mitt Romney. --  Yellowdesk 04:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single purpose accounts 

message: This section needs a little trimming and toning down of language. Right now it reads like a campaign brochure. Do we really need to quote people saying they "needed a white knight?" Do we need to quote three people who say he did a great job? Does Pres. Bush saying you did "a heckuva job" (sorry, "fabulous") really sound like a compliment these days? Besides, what else are these people going to say? Let's get rid of language like "the event needed new leadership and they launched a search." Let's also strike language like "He was charged with restoring faith in the beleaguered event, and rescuing the Olympics from failure." I've started with some obvious trims. Let's just stick with the basics here. This isn't the place to tell a story with drama.Notmyrealname 04:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2002 Olympics

message: Ok, one of the SPAs just reverted my attempts to trim and remove some of the puffery from this article, claiming they were "mass deletions" . (Sigh). Ok, so let's discuss my recent good faith edits:
#  We don't need to detail a company's financial performance here when it has its own article, and this makes a tacit claim that Romney is personally responsible for its success, which is a POV assertion, not a prooven fact.
#   tag is appropriate because the neutrality of this article is clearly in dispute.
#  Claiming the Games were "on the verge of disaster" is POV puffery, with the only goal of setting up Romney as some kind of savior. Let's just stick to the fact, and keep the commentary for the campaign trail. (and I don't even think the "white knight" reference is appropriate, but kept that in for now)
#  Lengthy discussion of the MA health care situation is not appropriate in a biographical article about Romney. Hey, look! There's actually an article for that already! Massachusetts 2006 Health Reform Statute.
#  How can you dispute that these two white lines should be deleted and that the claim that Romney supports charter schools needs to be cited?
Please explain why these edits make the article worse. This is an encyclopedia, and this article should provide biographical content about the subject. Please stop trying to block attempts to ensure neutrality in its treatment of the subject. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 15:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you.  I've reverted to your version, and encourage SierraOnFire to join in the discussion. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mass deletions" (sigh) 

message: == Crime stats ==
What should we do with the crime section? Tuviya says that it was attributing things to Romney that couldn't be backed up. This is a reasonable criticism. However, politicians usually claim credit when crime goes down and get blamed when it goes up. I think it's reasonable to assign some responsability to the person at the top when they've been in office for several years.
This is how the crime section was previously worded:
* Crime: According to statistics released by the Department of Justice the overall crime rate in Massachusetts has decreased 9% between 2002 (the year before Romney was elected) and 2005. Rates of violent crime, crimes against property, rape, aggravated assault, larceny and vehicle theft have all dropped during the same period while the murder rate has remained the same.[35] According to a review of data from the Department of Justice conducted by the Boston Phoenix, arrest rates for violent crimes have plummeted during Romney's tenure. The arrest rates for rape for the three years before Romney took office was 26%. This has fallen to 14% since then. During the same years, the arrest rate also declined sharply for the other three categories of major violent crime: the arrest rate for murder dropped from 48 percent to 26 percent; robbery, from 23 percent to 11 percent; and aggravated assault, from 48 percent to 29 percent.[36]. In July 2006 Romney offered the assistance of his state police force to municipalities dealing with increased crime rates. Romney's offers were rejected by local officials. Officials from Boston Police unions complained that "if state aid hadn't been cut in recent years, then the city's police force might be staffed adequately to handle the crime surge." [37]
I agree that the section could be improved, notably by shortening it, and giving some context (e.g. comparing MA crime stats to US crime stats). However, I think it does give a useful comparison by showing the difference between the declining crime rate and the much farther drop in arrest rates. This should be reworded, however, to make clear that they show different things. I'm afraid we're throwing the good out with the bad.Notmyrealname 19:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already trimmed some of it. Its not a question whether you or I think it is reasonable that the person "at the top" takes some credit - we need verifiable sources saying that due to Romney crime dropped in that period. We shouldn't be in the business of conjecture. On a broader note, this article shouldn't be about everything that happened during Romney's tenure, but about Romney. What he did, not just what happened around him. My $0.02. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with ZimZalaBim - but if Romney has notably taken credit for events (like a drop in crime rate, etc.) that happened during his tenure, it may be reasonable to include that he has claimed credit for it.  I'm not sure if that's been the case, but just wanted to put it out there. schi talk 20:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, if there is a reliable source indicating that Romney has taken credit or the drop in crime, we can note that he has taken such credit. But we shouldn't give credit simply due to correlations. -ZimZalaBim (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Alrighty. I believe what happened a while back was that one editor had put in the drop in crime stats, and I had supplemented it with the drop in arrest rates from the Phoenix. I fully agree that this whole page needs to be chopped down substantially, and this section is no exception. Just wanted to have folks talk this through.Notmyrealname 21:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the section looks fine now, FWIW.  Tuviya 21:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crime

message: What should we do with the crime section? Tuviya says that it was attributing things to Romney that couldn't be backed up. This is a reasonable criticism. However, politicians usually claim credit when crime goes down and get blamed when it goes up. I think it's reasonable to assign some responsability to the person at the top when they've been in office for several years.
This is how the crime section was previously worded:
* Crime: According to statistics released by the Department of Justice the overall crime rate in Massachusetts has decreased 9% between 2002 (the year before Romney was elected) and 2005. Rates of violent crime, crimes against property, rape, aggravated assault, larceny and vehicle theft have all dropped during the same period while the murder rate has remained the same.[35] According to a review of data from the Department of Justice conducted by the Boston Phoenix, arrest rates for violent crimes have plummeted during Romney's tenure. The arrest rates for rape for the three years before Romney took office was 26%. This has fallen to 14% since then. During the same years, the arrest rate also declined sharply for the other three categories of major violent crime: the arrest rate for murder dropped from 48 percent to 26 percent; robbery, from 23 percent to 11 percent; and aggravated assault, from 48 percent to 29 percent.[36]. In July 2006 Romney offered the assistance of his state police force to municipalities dealing with increased crime rates. Romney's offers were rejected by local officials. Officials from Boston Police unions complained that "if state aid hadn't been cut in recent years, then the city's police force might be staffed adequately to handle the crime surge." [37]
I agree that the section could be improved, notably by shortening it, and giving some context (e.g. comparing MA crime stats to US crime stats). However, I think it does give a useful comparison by showing the difference between the declining crime rate and the much farther drop in arrest rates. This should be reworded, however, to make clear that they show different things. I'm afraid we're throwing the good out with the bad.Notmyrealname 19:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already trimmed some of it. Its not a question whether you or I think it is reasonable that the person "at the top" takes some credit - we need verifiable sources saying that due to Romney crime dropped in that period. We shouldn't be in the business of conjecture. On a broader note, this article shouldn't be about everything that happened during Romney's tenure, but about Romney. What he did, not just what happened around him. My $0.02. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with ZimZalaBim - but if Romney has notably taken credit for events (like a drop in crime rate, etc.) that happened during his tenure, it may be reasonable to include that he has claimed credit for it.  I'm not sure if that's been the case, but just wanted to put it out there. schi talk 20:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, if there is a reliable source indicating that Romney has taken credit or the drop in crime, we can note that he has taken such credit. But we shouldn't give credit simply due to correlations. -ZimZalaBim (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Alrighty. I believe what happened a while back was that one editor had put in the drop in crime stats, and I had supplemented it with the drop in arrest rates from the Phoenix. I fully agree that this whole page needs to be chopped down substantially, and this section is no exception. Just wanted to have folks talk this through.Notmyrealname 21:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the section looks fine now, FWIW.  Tuviya 21:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime stats 

message: There are a few instances in the article where it says Romney signed such-and-such legislation -- I am not intimately familiar with how things are done in the Massachusetts legislature, but my initial reaction (which appears to be confirmed by this article) is that it is routine for the governor to sign legislation that is passed by the legislature.  I'm sure the implication is that the governor was in some way responsible - or at least more so than the legislature - for these laws, but, for example in the "Military and veterans' benefits" section, it's not at all clear that he was. Can someone clarify?  Generally, and in line with the discussion in the above section, I'd like to see some clearer distinctions between what Romney has specifically done, as opposed to what happened in the legislature during his term. schi talk 20:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its is actually not routine for romney to sign something. He is a repub. His state is heavily democratic. They probably dont agree on much and he probably vetos bills (unlike pres Bush who had both a republican house and senate. He didnt veto much). Also, The veterans benifits section says that he "filed" the bill. This means that he worte it and worked with the legislature on it. He was a part of the development of the legislation. The section notes that he worked with the legislature so it looks good.--216.236.252.234 20:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I see how it's not routine - but I think it should be clarified that his signature is approving the legislature's bill, and not that he's necessarily responsible for it.  And regarding the veterans section, I was referring to the first sentence ("On September 23, 2004, Romney signed legislation prohibiting employment discrimination against members of the military, including those serving in the National Guard and Reserve. The bill also created a “Commission on Veterans’ Employment Opportunities”.") not the Welcome Home bill. schi talk 21:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue of Romney toughing it out in a Democratic state has been raised before, and I just wanted to add that it should not be used as a wholesale excuse to include stuff that he wasn't able to pass. It is not unusual for states to have a governor of one party and a legislature of another. MA itself has had many years of this scenario. The governor should still be judged on what they were able to accomplish through negotiation and persuasion. That said, we should be very precise in terms of what we share of credit we give to Romney for any particular piece of legislation. The health care reform itself seems to have come out of a long negotiating process from both the legislature and the executive branch and the mention here should reflect that.Notmyrealname 21:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree.  The things he wanted to do but had no chance of passing in the legislature belong more in a "political views" section than a "governorship" section.  By the same token, the article should not give Romney too much credit for legislation passed with a supermajority (since the legislature could pass it regardless of his opinions, he was irrelevant to its passage). Fagles 02:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

text: On that topic, every veto overide qualifies as admendments rejected by the legislature. Several budgets have this sort of back and forth, and the Health Care reform law is notable too in this regard too, where the legislature indicated Romney's vetos were not acceptable.  Mitt_Romney#Health_care. -- 24.63.7.9 04:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Legislature's acts

message: == Abortion chronology ==
In this diff, anonymous IP address 216.236.252.234 reverted my changes, claiming that my edit disrupted chronology.  I'm going to revert, as my changes were not limited to chronological order and I would rather not see them lost without discussing their merits.  As for chronology, this is how my edit presented the events:
#Summary of current positions
#Romney's position in 1994
#Romney's position in 2002
#Romney's position in 2005 and his own explanation of how his views have changed since 2002.
I feel this is better than the revert.  Thoughts? schi talk 21:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point Redsox777, but he hasn't done anything on abortion during his governorship. He has taken some positions and made some moves on other things that he claims relate to abortion. I think putting it in chronological order makes more sense for the readerNotmyrealname 21:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - I see your point about focusing on what he's done in his governorship (that's why I wanted to focus on his current positions first).  Personally, I think it's more straightforward and intuitive to read each section chronologically, but that may be a difference in opinion. How about in the intro paragraph we discuss his substantive actions regarding abortion as governor, and then go back and do the chronological tracing of his "evolution".  Also, I think my edit preserved plenty of his explanation for his "evolution" on the issue - I cut out the whole anecdote about turning to his chief of staff and saying, "Beth..." - but still retained a short sum-up (following discussion with stem cell experts at Harvard) with ref so readers could read the whole story.  In a concise encylopedia article, we don't need to keep anecdotes like that in place. schi talk 22:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be good to have a "political views" section in addition to the "governorship" section.  Most of the abortion stuff could be moved to the new "veiws" section, since not much has happened regarding abortion during his term.  There is already a section on stem cell research.  This would mirror the organization of other politician articles such as John McCain.  In the new "political views" section on abortion, I think Schi's organizition will make the most sense: summary of current views, then history of views in chronological order.  Fagles 02:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abortion 

message: In this diff, anonymous IP address 216.236.252.234 reverted my changes, claiming that my edit disrupted chronology.  I'm going to revert, as my changes were not limited to chronological order and I would rather not see them lost without discussing their merits.  As for chronology, this is how my edit presented the events:
#Summary of current positions
#Romney's position in 1994
#Romney's position in 2002
#Romney's position in 2005 and his own explanation of how his views have changed since 2002.
I feel this is better than the revert.  Thoughts? schi talk 21:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point Redsox777, but he hasn't done anything on abortion during his governorship. He has taken some positions and made some moves on other things that he claims relate to abortion. I think putting it in chronological order makes more sense for the readerNotmyrealname 21:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - I see your point about focusing on what he's done in his governorship (that's why I wanted to focus on his current positions first).  Personally, I think it's more straightforward and intuitive to read each section chronologically, but that may be a difference in opinion. How about in the intro paragraph we discuss his substantive actions regarding abortion as governor, and then go back and do the chronological tracing of his "evolution".  Also, I think my edit preserved plenty of his explanation for his "evolution" on the issue - I cut out the whole anecdote about turning to his chief of staff and saying, "Beth..." - but still retained a short sum-up (following discussion with stem cell experts at Harvard) with ref so readers could read the whole story.  In a concise encylopedia article, we don't need to keep anecdotes like that in place. schi talk 22:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be good to have a "political views" section in addition to the "governorship" section.  Most of the abortion stuff could be moved to the new "veiws" section, since not much has happened regarding abortion during his term.  There is already a section on stem cell research.  This would mirror the organization of other politician articles such as John McCain.  In the new "political views" section on abortion, I think Schi's organizition will make the most sense: summary of current views, then history of views in chronological order.  Fagles 02:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abortion chronology 

message: An anonymous IP address 216.236.252.234 just reverted my edits to the business section. 
My edits read as follows:
After graduating from Harvard Business School, Romney went to work for the Boston Consulting Group, where he had been a summer intern in 1974.Lewis, Raphael and Helman, Scott. "Romney Cultivating Jewish Ties" Boston Globe, November 8, 2005, retrieved October 28, 2006. From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc., a Boston-based management consulting firm. In 1984, Romney left the company to co-found Bain Capital, a private equity investment firm.Pappu, Sridhar. "The Holy Cow! Candidate", The Atlantic Monthly, September 2005, retrieved October 28, 2006
In 1990 Romney returned to Bain & Company as CEO to manage the company through a period of financial turmoil.Rees, Matthew. "Mister PowerPoint Goes to Washington" The American, December 1, 2006, retrieved December 16, 2006.
Following his year at Bain & Company, Romney returned to Bain Capital.
The revised edits read like this:
After graduating from Harvard Business School, Romney went to work for the Boston Consulting Group, where he had been a summer intern in 1974.Lewis, Raphael and Helman, Scott. "Romney Cultivating Jewish Ties" Boston Globe, November 8, 2005, retrieved October 28, 2006. From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc., a Boston-based management consulting firm. In 1984, Romney left the company to co-found Bain Capital, which quickly became a highly successful private equity investment firm.Pappu, Sridhar. "The Holy Cow! Candidate", The Atlantic Monthly, September 2005, retrieved October 28, 2006
In 1990 Romney was asked to return to Bain & Company, which was facing financial collapse. As CEO, Romney managed an effort to restructure the firm's employee stock-ownership plan, real-estate deals and bank loans, while increasing fiscal transparency. Within a year, he had led Bain & Company through a highly successful turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without layoffs or partner defections.Rees, Matthew. "Mister PowerPoint Goes to Washington" The American, December 1, 2006, retrieved December 16, 2006.
Following his year at Bain & Company, Romney returned to Bain Capital. During the 14 years he headed the company, Bain Capital's average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent. During Romney's tenure, the firm founded, acquired or invested in hundreds of companies including Staples Inc., Bright Horizons Family Solutions, Brookstone, Domino's, Sealy and The Sports Authority.  Romney left Bain Capital in 1998 to head the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games.
The revised edits are very close in language to the magazine articles that they cite, and are not written in a NPOV encyclopedic style. I tried to remove value-laden language like "quickly became a highly successful private equity firm." Why not just call it a private equity firm? Why say that he was asked to return to lead it out of financial collapse? This is a little too much color. What the heck is an "annual internalized rate of return" and why should we care? How do we know that this can be attributed to Romney? Maybe the market was booming in general? Maybe he had really good employees? People can read the company links to find out more. Let's stick with where he worked and when. I'll leave it to others to change this.Notmyrealname 21:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also note that 216.236.252.234 has a history of being blocked for vandalism. Notmyrealname 21:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. I'm for deleting all of these as trivial.Notmyrealname 17:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think you should delete taxes or housing. The Boston Globe article from today said that that will be Romney's major legacy, while taxes are probably one of the most important issues to be considered for any governor or us presidential candidate. myclob 19:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Business fluff

message: Now that some time has passed, I think we need to review whether this belongs on this page. If we keep it, do we really need to devote so much space? In the end, Romney denied the guy a police escort. Who cares? Does this really belong on Romney's bio page?Notmyrealname 03:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm for deleting all of these as trivial.Notmyrealname 17:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think you should delete taxes or housing. The Boston Globe article from today said that that will be Romney's major legacy, while taxes are probably one of the most important issues to be considered for any governor or us presidential candidate. myclob 19:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Khatami Controversy 

message: == Romney Governorship as a Separate Article ==
I believe this article is the longest US gubernatorial article on wikipedia.  The article will get longer as the Presidential campaign continues. 
Isn't it time to push the governor's administration and political detail into a separate article, relieving the Biography of items that are not biography at all?
I propose the followinging titles, with the aim that others might come up with better titles. Add yours below with signature:  ~~~  -- Yellowdesk 03:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My view is that the article on the Romney Administration already exists, in plain sight, and pushing it from the too-long Biography page, into its own page would allow a terse summary of five to ten paragraphs in the Biography. That terse summary is where the new writing would have to occur. Yellowdesk 15:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Should we make his shorter, or the other candidates longer? Einstein said things should be made as simple as possible but not more simple. What is more important that having an un-biased place for information on our presidential candidates? We should make it un-biased. We should create sub-sections, if information should go somewhere else. But lets not delete information, and make people go to either a pro-romney, or an anti-romney site. I would rather make McCain's and the other sites bigger than delete this info. Sure fix up this info, make it NPOV and all that, but lets let people go somewhere else good (within the wiki world) if they want additional infomyclob 20:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This suggestion would require perhaps fifty editors to expand twenty other articles. Not likely to occur soon. See: United States presidential election, 2008 -- Yellowdesk 07:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Presidential Articles are a good example and model. There is a lot of non-biographical information that is conveyed in articles that are not formally part of the BIO, but linked to the bio. Non-biography policy information, for example. Take a look at Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. It is interesting how many sub articles there are to each of these biography pages, This  allows the particular topic to be expanded upon without making the biography page huge.  It improves the biography page in an encyclopedic manner, and saves information (and work referencing it) from being needlessly deleted, and it makes it possible for the prose of the biography to be compelling, by pushing the detail elsewhere. I should mention one of the qualifications for a featured article is brilliant prose and article stability. This would help in both areas, by pushing some of the detail and fights off of the biography page.  Here's a list of those sections that cite articles for fuller detail. -- Yellowdesk 00:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

text: This view presumes there will be no assessment or analysis of the Romney administration during the next two years, or further research on the analysis and articles that already are ublished. A view of history as ossification. In any case, the presidential examples above are simply to show how it is done. Bear in mind that this Romney article is already the longest Governor's article on Wikipedia, and longer than a number of Presidential articles, because detailed text is not pushed into sub-articles. -- Yellowdesk 09:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

text: On the contrary, a magazine or newspaper article cited in wikipedia is a fine example of a published assessment or analysis of facts, and one about Romney may well be relevant to this page. For Romney Governorship and Administration, there will continue to be unearthing of facts, found in public documents, and assessments made of those documents and facts. Here is a recent front page analysis and assessment that has been cited already on the Mitt Romney  page:* By Brian C. Mooney.   Romney left Mass. on 212 days in '06: Visited 35 states; built a national network   Boston Globe (December 24, 2006). There will be continuing and similar appraisals as the Romney presidential candidacy moves forward, and assessment of the Romney team's planning and managment capabilities, as a campaigners, and as an administration. Analysis by members of the national media, local media and academics.  All of this will unearth new information, and assessments of that information, and will be citable on wikipedia.  Hence the section is eminently capable of growing in the future, instead of freezing. The Governorship section should be set into a sub-article to make way for new summaries as the life of Romney continues. -- Yellowdesk 05:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Organization

message: I believe this article is the longest US gubernatorial article on wikipedia.  The article will get longer as the Presidential campaign continues. 
Isn't it time to push the governor's administration and political detail into a separate article, relieving the Biography of items that are not biography at all?
I propose the followinging titles, with the aim that others might come up with better titles. Add yours below with signature:  ~~~  -- Yellowdesk 03:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My view is that the article on the Romney Administration already exists, in plain sight, and pushing it from the too-long Biography page, into its own page would allow a terse summary of five to ten paragraphs in the Biography. That terse summary is where the new writing would have to occur. Yellowdesk 15:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Should we make his shorter, or the other candidates longer? Einstein said things should be made as simple as possible but not more simple. What is more important that having an un-biased place for information on our presidential candidates? We should make it un-biased. We should create sub-sections, if information should go somewhere else. But lets not delete information, and make people go to either a pro-romney, or an anti-romney site. I would rather make McCain's and the other sites bigger than delete this info. Sure fix up this info, make it NPOV and all that, but lets let people go somewhere else good (within the wiki world) if they want additional infomyclob 20:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This suggestion would require perhaps fifty editors to expand twenty other articles. Not likely to occur soon. See: United States presidential election, 2008 -- Yellowdesk 07:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Presidential Articles are a good example and model. There is a lot of non-biographical information that is conveyed in articles that are not formally part of the BIO, but linked to the bio. Non-biography policy information, for example. Take a look at Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. It is interesting how many sub articles there are to each of these biography pages, This  allows the particular topic to be expanded upon without making the biography page huge.  It improves the biography page in an encyclopedic manner, and saves information (and work referencing it) from being needlessly deleted, and it makes it possible for the prose of the biography to be compelling, by pushing the detail elsewhere. I should mention one of the qualifications for a featured article is brilliant prose and article stability. This would help in both areas, by pushing some of the detail and fights off of the biography page.  Here's a list of those sections that cite articles for fuller detail. -- Yellowdesk 00:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

text: This view presumes there will be no assessment or analysis of the Romney administration during the next two years, or further research on the analysis and articles that already are ublished. A view of history as ossification. In any case, the presidential examples above are simply to show how it is done. Bear in mind that this Romney article is already the longest Governor's article on Wikipedia, and longer than a number of Presidential articles, because detailed text is not pushed into sub-articles. -- Yellowdesk 09:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

text: On the contrary, a magazine or newspaper article cited in wikipedia is a fine example of a published assessment or analysis of facts, and one about Romney may well be relevant to this page. For Romney Governorship and Administration, there will continue to be unearthing of facts, found in public documents, and assessments made of those documents and facts. Here is a recent front page analysis and assessment that has been cited already on the Mitt Romney  page:* By Brian C. Mooney.   Romney left Mass. on 212 days in '06: Visited 35 states; built a national network   Boston Globe (December 24, 2006). There will be continuing and similar appraisals as the Romney presidential candidacy moves forward, and assessment of the Romney team's planning and managment capabilities, as a campaigners, and as an administration. Analysis by members of the national media, local media and academics.  All of this will unearth new information, and assessments of that information, and will be citable on wikipedia.  Hence the section is eminently capable of growing in the future, instead of freezing. The Governorship section should be set into a sub-article to make way for new summaries as the life of Romney continues. -- Yellowdesk 05:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romney Governorship as a Separate Article 

message: == MBA / JD joint degree ==
..."In 1975, Romney completed the degree of M.B.A., graduating in the top 5 percent of his class from Harvard Business School. He was named a Baker Scholar.[5] In 1975 he also received his J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School"
What actually happened was Romney was admitted to a Harvard Program that allowed you to recieve both at the same time...
I propose changing it to read
"In 1975, Romney recieved a joint M.B.A. and J.D. from Harvard from Harvard Business School and Law School. He was named a Baker Scholar from Harvard Law and graduated cum laude from both Harvard Law and Business School.
The top 5 percent is the same thing as cum laude isn't it? I thought he was cum laude from both harvard business and law...
Anyways, he graduated from both at the same time...myclob 19:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Myclob wrote: "The top 5 percent is the same thing as cum laude isn't it?"  No, not according to the Harvard Law School website: Harvard Law School recognizes the achievement of attaining and maintaining high grades through graduation honors.  Students who graduate with a general average of 7.20 and above are honored with the distinction of graduating summa cum laude.  The top 10% of the class, excluding summa, are honored with the distinction of graduating magna cum laude.  Finally, the next 30% of the class, after magna  are honored with the distinction of graduating cum laude.  Thus, if he graduated cum laude from HLS, he was somewhere in the top 40% but was not in the top 10%.  Fagles 02:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

text: One point of clarification: he graduated from the 4-year JD/MBA joint program, which is a bit different from completing each degree separately.  Fagles 21:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Background

message: ..."In 1975, Romney completed the degree of M.B.A., graduating in the top 5 percent of his class from Harvard Business School. He was named a Baker Scholar.[5] In 1975 he also received his J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School"
What actually happened was Romney was admitted to a Harvard Program that allowed you to recieve both at the same time...
I propose changing it to read
"In 1975, Romney recieved a joint M.B.A. and J.D. from Harvard from Harvard Business School and Law School. He was named a Baker Scholar from Harvard Law and graduated cum laude from both Harvard Law and Business School.
The top 5 percent is the same thing as cum laude isn't it? I thought he was cum laude from both harvard business and law...
Anyways, he graduated from both at the same time...myclob 19:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Myclob wrote: "The top 5 percent is the same thing as cum laude isn't it?"  No, not according to the Harvard Law School website: Harvard Law School recognizes the achievement of attaining and maintaining high grades through graduation honors.  Students who graduate with a general average of 7.20 and above are honored with the distinction of graduating summa cum laude.  The top 10% of the class, excluding summa, are honored with the distinction of graduating magna cum laude.  Finally, the next 30% of the class, after magna  are honored with the distinction of graduating cum laude.  Thus, if he graduated cum laude from HLS, he was somewhere in the top 40% but was not in the top 10%.  Fagles 02:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

text: One point of clarification: he graduated from the 4-year JD/MBA joint program, which is a bit different from completing each degree separately.  Fagles 21:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MBA / JD joint degree 

message: Do we need to convert the language in this article to past tense now that Romney's term is over?Notmyrealname 05:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Past tense conversion?

message: I am inclined to put the sections in chronological order, changing "Political Campaigns" section." 
The campaign for president will bury the short governorship section, and since it is the currently occuring activity, the presidential campaign should be at the bottom of the page/article.
Presently (as of Jan 10, 2007 here)
1. Biography
1.1 Early life and education
1.2 Business career
1.3 CEO of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee
2 Political Campaigns
2.1 Massachusetts Campaign for United States Senate, 1994 election
2.2 Campaign for Massachusetts Governor, 2002 election
2.3 Campaign for United States President, 2008 election
3 Governorship
Proposed:
1  Early life and family
2 Education
3 Business career
4 CEO of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee
5 Early Political Campaigns
5.1 Massachusetts Campaign for United States Senate, 1994 election
5.2 Campaign for Massachusetts Governor, 2002 election
6  Governorship
7 Campaign for United States President, 2008 election
I propose the Presidential campaign be a top level section, to better permit subsections in the Presidential Campaign.
Or ALL of the sections could be made top level for consistency.
Comment and criticism invited. -- Yellowdesk 03:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal on reordering the sections and section levels 

message: Should we list endorsements for Romney's 2008 nomination bid? None of the other contenders have them. Also, every candidate gets a million of these, so this list will go very long. Seems to border on campaign PR to me, but I'd appreciate if others would weigh in.Notmyrealname 05:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and another strategy is to have a sub page: List of politicians endorsing Romney -- Yellowdesk 14:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Endorsements

message: == Use of either Botox, or cosmetic surgery by Romney? ==
For the third time today I heard mention of Mitt Romney's possible use of Botox or cosmetic surgery, supposedly received in Concord, MA at Emerson Hospital. Online searches show many returns, and there are hints of a CNN story, possibly timed to follow an official announcement of candidacy. Anyone have citable information on this subject? Mormons are prohibited from using elective anti-aging or cosmetic procedures. Restoration or correction of damge from an accident, or disease (auto-immune) is allowed. CApitol3 04:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Looks

message: For the third time today I heard mention of Mitt Romney's possible use of Botox or cosmetic surgery, supposedly received in Concord, MA at Emerson Hospital. Online searches show many returns, and there are hints of a CNN story, possibly timed to follow an official announcement of candidacy. Anyone have citable information on this subject? Mormons are prohibited from using elective anti-aging or cosmetic procedures. Restoration or correction of damge from an accident, or disease (auto-immune) is allowed. CApitol3 04:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of either Botox, or cosmetic surgery by Romney? 

message: In the 2002 governor race section it says "During the general election Romney ran on a reform platform." What does "reform platform" mean exactly? Wasn't he preceded by other Republican governors for the previous eight years?Notmyrealname 18:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reform platform?

message: == "Janet Mitt Romney"? ==
Someone changed Willard Mitt Romney to Janet Mitt Romney. I'm changing it; it appears to be vandalism. 
Janet Mitt Romney Theyre at it again. Changed it to Janet. It's most likely vandalism, I'll watch this page. I'll check and see if it is actually "Janet" or not. N734LQ 00:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Someone changed Willard Mitt Romney to Janet Mitt Romney. I'm changing it; it appears to be vandalism. 
Janet Mitt Romney Theyre at it again. Changed it to Janet. It's most likely vandalism, I'll watch this page. I'll check and see if it is actually "Janet" or not. N734LQ 00:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Janet Mitt Romney"? 

message: It says Romney is an Eagle Scout, but I heard Romney say on the  Michael Medved show, after Michael Medved introduced him as an Eagle Scout, that he really isn't one (but some of his sons are). I dunno how to get a transcript of the interview, though; is there any source that verifies he isn't an Eagle Scout? I'm pretty sure there are news articles that falsely report him as one, that's how that fact keeps floating around. I don't want to delete the sentence, though, because my source (the Medved interview) isn't available anymore, as far as I know (except maybe to subscribers to his site). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.8.115.11 (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is not.  See Hugh Hewitt's book A Mormon in the White House? pg. 79. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.138.60.136 (talk) 05:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: A newspaper that a lot of this came from has retracted it. Seems to a confusion with his sons being Eagles. See . I've removed the cat from the article.Rlevse 22:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  He isn't an Eagle Scout. 

message: == How much do you want to bet that the person who linked to this "Article" wrote it? ==
"Romney on Iran and Iraq Mormons For Peace, January 24, 2007"
This should not be listed in the "articles about Romney" section... No one cares about this site, and what it has to say. The New York Times, Boston Globe, and Mormons for Peace? Come on. Get real.
The video of Romney’s debate with Kennedy is highly cut... can we get a more un-biased, full video?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.75.59 (talk • contribs) February 4, 2007
::I removed the blog link. The editor who put it in James Oliveleaf can see if it survives as prose with a citation over on the presidential campaign page. -- Yellowdesk 05:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Fixed misleading signature above of User:GearedBull per  this edit) -- Yellowdesk 05:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can we remove arguments for or against Romney? This is not the forum for someone to say we should not vote for Romney... The above comment should be removed... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.131.75.59 (talk) 00:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Critisisms

message: "Romney on Iran and Iraq Mormons For Peace, January 24, 2007"
This should not be listed in the "articles about Romney" section... No one cares about this site, and what it has to say. The New York Times, Boston Globe, and Mormons for Peace? Come on. Get real.
The video of Romney’s debate with Kennedy is highly cut... can we get a more un-biased, full video?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.75.59 (talk • contribs) February 4, 2007
::I removed the blog link. The editor who put it in James Oliveleaf can see if it survives as prose with a citation over on the presidential campaign page. -- Yellowdesk 05:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How much do you want to bet that the person who linked to this "Article" wrote it? 

message: I don't see Mitt Romney's membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as an issue, moreso it is the fast mounting number of latter-day "conversions" the man seem to be having on his policies. Conservatives should know Mr. Romney could not have been elected governor of that bluest of blue states without having at least pretended to have been socially moderate (which in other states might easily be termed liberal). The real question is when is the man pretending? When he assures a group of Republican homosexuals (I know, who'd of thunk that) he would be a better friend to them than Ted Kennedy or Bill Clinton, or when he stood up before a gathering of the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and assured them he wouldn't seek to overturn abortion laws? Or, maybe his stance on the death penalty, or would it be Iraq troop deployment? There's so much to choose from. 
What conservatives should be concerned about is that he will likely be similarly as dependable to them as he was to Massachusetts' liberals. Worse, it isn't difficult to see James Carville's eyes fill with glee with the prospect of casting Mr. Romney as a sort of oily political prostitute: "I was against abortion before I was for it, and now I am defintely against it again. I mean it this time." Of course somewhere the Log Cabin Republicans have a video of Mitt telling them how much better a supporter of gays he would be than Ted Kennedy. That will really be rich in a September '08 television ad. 
On wikipedia it seems there isn't a way of keeping even a cited, linked, sourced statement that is in the tiniest way inconvenient or less than sterlingly praiseworthy on either of the Romney articles. It is summarily labeled irrelevant and reverted. With a small army of supporting editors and unregistered users, working under a banner of Mitt, reverts can take place quickly, and the 3 revert limit by a single member easily overcome. 
But there won't be a revert button for the televised 527 group ads where Mitt, in his own voice, tells an auditorium full of homosexuals (the two muscled tank top-clad lads cuddling on his left are a nice touch) he will be a better friend to them than Ted Kennedy. User:GearedBull 00:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Fixed misleading signature above of User:GearedBull per  this edit) -- Yellowdesk 05:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can we remove arguments for or against Romney? This is not the forum for someone to say we should not vote for Romney... The above comment should be removed... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.131.75.59 (talk) 00:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  180-degree turns on abortion, death penalty, homosexuality, and Iraq war issues 

message: This video is heavily edited. If it gave us the raw information, I would consider it less biased, but it clips and cuts and takes him out of context. myclob 12:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this is a reasonable criticism. This link has come and gone and come back a number of times. -- Yellowdesk 14:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it was a big story, but I don't know if it's tactics are worthy of an encyclopedia...If we don't have any standards, what will encourage someone to release an un-edited, more accurate version of the debate for the good of the country? I don't mean to sound all noble and everything, but isn't transparency good? Why hide the rest, unless you have an agenda. I guess we have pro-Romney videos from his official YouTube site...maybe we should create a list of all Romney videos by year! I can do it on my site... http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Videos I'll start putting them here by year... I'll include the negative ones too... myclob 01:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text:  It appears to be time to delete the edited version of the event, pending a full video link, and that has been done. Complete video and link to it welcome and invited. -- Yellowdesk 02:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text:  Edits aside Kennedy's quote about himself being pro choice, and Romney being multiple choice should be included in the article.GrEp 20:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video of 1994 Romney/Kennedy debate hosted on YouTube  

message: *There is an active discussion about potentially revising the name of Political views of Mitt Romney to Political positions of Mitt Romney, or, depending on how the conversation develops, some other name.  In case you're interested,  go to  Talk:Political views of Mitt Romney#Requested move. 
*A brief history; the article started as a section called Political positions  in the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2008 article, following a discussion here at Talk:Mitt_Romney#This page lacks personal political beliefs.  It became a stand alone article in mid-March. 
::-- Yellowdesk 04:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion about title of [[Political views of Mitt Romney]] article 

message: This might be worth noting because it made a few headlines and is a unique tactic, but the line that was added on 14:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It belongs on the Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2008, as a detail related to the campaign. -- Yellowdesk 04:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call.--Atomicskier 15:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Students for Mitt" 

message: This entry appears to be little more than a fluff public relations brochure typed up a junior member of Romney's own staff. TJ aka Teej 21:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your specific critque and particular proposals for improving the article  to obtain the Neutral Point of View you desire are invited, so that a discussion among the editors on how to accomplish that might occur. -- Yellowdesk 05:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Where's Wiki's No Point Of View Policy? 

message: I assume this should be Ann. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.84.200.55 (talk) 17:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitt Romeny's wife name is listed as Alan 

message: The article referenced stating that he is an eagle is not accurate.  He has stated in interviews on television and radio that he was not an eagle. As an addendum, some of his sons have earned the eagle badge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.177.250.253 (talk) 05:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hewitt, Hugh, "A Mormon in the White House," pg. 79. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.251.236.130 (talk) 07:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitt was not an eagle scout. 

message: It is mentioned on this talk page, only in passing and re a/the trivia section, that his football-playing uncle Milton Romney (who has a small Web presence, including citations of national print media) is the origin of "Mitt". In my household "What kind of goofball goes by 'Mitt'?" is a (very minor) campaign issue, and of course  YMMV. It's that much less trivial in the context of the deprecated "Willard", after J. Willard Marriott, the Mormon head of the Marriott companies (which are Mormon enough that their Las Vegas facilities are apparently the major gambling-free venues) and supposedly his father's best friend. I'm not advocating we undertake OR on this, but we should be alert to whether these hints of his lifelong imbedment in an interesting family/cultural matrix are on their way to emerging as a notable, even if peripheral, campaign issue.--Jerzy•t 02:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Willard Mitt Romney was named after J Willard Marriott, who was the founder and owner of the Marriott chain of hotels.  The hotels have no connection with the Mormon church other than the owner (Marriott) was a Mormon, and he does put a Book of Mormon in each nightstand along with the Gideon Bible. I don't know the origin of Mitt, but this information was confirmed on his appearance on the Tonight Show recently. Bytebear 04:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Willard? Mitt? 

message: Did Romney follow church teachings and go on a two year mission? TJ aka Teej 11:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: -- Yellowdesk 14:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  For clarification, a Bishop (Mormonism) is a 5 year (give or take)calling, and is basically the same as a pastor or reverent of a congregation. Bytebear 04:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early life 

message: New article out in NY Times where his aides estimate Romney to be worth $260 to $350 million: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/12/us/politics/12romney.html?ref=politics 64.252.193.223 13:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Net Worth at least $260 million 

message: Political positions section should be kept short.  It's a biography, not an ad.  I think some of this can be trimmed.    Maybe I'll do it tomorrow.  A few lines, ok, not more.  May shift it to his political positions articlePipermantolisopa 04:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia is not an advertising service

message: I just removed recently-added text (something to the effect of "He avoided service in Viet Nam by receiving a deferment") because it is not at all clear, based on those portions of the Miller article that are available online and without registration, whether a deferment was received so that he could do LDS service in France, or if he did so for the underlying purpose of "avoiding" the war.
Aside from all of that, I'm not sure that I'm crazy about using this article as a reference, since it is not available in its entirety without registration/payment to NRO (National Review Online).
What do others think?  DagnyB 23:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that views on the death penalty are much more relevant to a president's position than abortion.  The president actually has the power to grant amnesty, appeal to governors, and set standards for the federal death penalty, while a president only gets to appoint judges that may have a certain view if a Supreme Court justice leaves or dies during that president's term.   Civil unions are also important in this case because of how Romney dealt with the situation as Mass. governor (where civil unions were legalized during his term by the Supreme Court of MA) and because of how he has now approached the issue.  And actually, views on Hugo Chavez can tell you a lot about a politician's political views.  I would actually say that the more positions listed, the better; is it a "Political Positions" section or not?---Gloriamarie 18:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miller (2005) 

message: What's the purpose of the last 2 paragraphs, re: death penalty, civil unions, etc.  President has little to do with death penalty.  Possibly better mentioned under the political positions article.  If you list his death penalty position, why not list his position on broccoli (Bush, Sr. was opposed to it) and his opinion on Hugo Chavez?  Listing too many positions makes the article become an ad.  The abortion position seems relevant to his biography because of a relative's death.Pipermantolisopa 04:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that views on the death penalty are much more relevant to a president's position than abortion.  The president actually has the power to grant amnesty, appeal to governors, and set standards for the federal death penalty, while a president only gets to appoint judges that may have a certain view if a Supreme Court justice leaves or dies during that president's term.   Civil unions are also important in this case because of how Romney dealt with the situation as Mass. governor (where civil unions were legalized during his term by the Supreme Court of MA) and because of how he has now approached the issue.  And actually, views on Hugo Chavez can tell you a lot about a politician's political views.  I would actually say that the more positions listed, the better; is it a "Political Positions" section or not?---Gloriamarie 18:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  political positions section 

message: If he is the one who said “I’m glad they are at Guantanamo, I don’t want them on our soil, I want them at Guantanamo, where they don’t get the access to our lawyers. I don’t want them to be on our prisons. Some people have said we had to close Guantanamo. My view is we have to double Guantanamo. We have to make sure that the terrorists…” - he is an idiot.
"This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mitt Romney article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject."  See talk page guidelines. Alanraywiki 22:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debate 

message: The bio section states: "The Romney’s are practicing Mormons and members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."  This implies that Mormons are anything but identical to "members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."  But this is not the case.  They are the same thing.  I am editing this sentence to read: The Romney’s are practicing members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons). Tommysnow 05:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This needs to be responded to before the language is put back in the article in the objected-to form. Askme1 19:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes,  if you can cite to the article, which presumably is a reliable source. -- Yellowdesk 14:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography Section 

message: When reading an article on Romney, I thought it was interesting that he's said that he was an independent during the Reagan years and voted for Democrat Paul Tsongas in the 1992 presidential primary.  This is interesting and should be included in this article, possibly in early years?--Gloriamarie 21:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes,  if you can cite to the article, which presumably is a reliable source. -- Yellowdesk 14:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Used to be Independent and voted for some Democrats 

message: I tagged the governorship section as having its accuracy and neutrality disputed.  The section is not a neutral summary of his governorship.  It basically consists of one paragraph of inaccurate, over-the-top praise, followed by a long paragraph of criticism that probably is not important enough to be such a big part of this summary.  I would delete the praise (discussed below), delete the long discussion of his out-of-state travel, and add more important neutral information such as the passage of the health care bill (probably the most noteworthy accomplishment of his term).
Here are some of the main inaccurate / POV statements:
1) "During this time he did not raise taxes or debt." (source: Mitt Romney Inc. website).
: Read Governorship of Mitt Romney#Fiscal policy for the full story and citations.  Basically, he increased the amount of money that people had to pay the government.  He said that these increases don't count as taxes, but his characterization is hotly disputed.  
::*Romney approved $128 million in tax changes such as such as sales tax from purchases on the Internet (internet sales tax) and raised another $181 million in additional business taxes in the next two years; businesses called these changes tax increases, but Romney defended them as the elimination of "loopholes."  This article should not take a position on whether changing th law to force businesses to pay more taxes counts as a "tax increase" (as the businesses said) or as "closing loopholes" (as Romney said).  
::*Romney raised hundreds of fees, including doubled fees for court filings, professional regulations, driver's licenses, marriage licenses, and firearm licenses, raising $500 million in the first year of the program.  Does this count as "increases in the gun tax" or not?  This article should not decide.  
::*Romney increased the state gasoline fee by 2 cents per gallon.  Is this an "increase in gas taxes" or simply an increase in "gas fees"?  This article should not take a position.  
::*Tuition at state colleges and universities increased 63% during the Romney governorship.  This article should not decide wether this is a "tax on education" or not.
::*Romney signed legislation allowing local commercial property taxes to be raised, which resulted in $100 million more in property taxes from local business owners.  This article shouldn't take a position on whether Romney should get credit for those tax increases.
2) "He also proceeded to end his term with a 1 billion dollar surplus(source: Mitt Romney Inc. website).
::This claim is, at best, highly disputed.  His successor claims that Romney left the state with a 1 billion dollar deficit.   
3) "as well as lower taxes and a lower unemployment rate."(source: Mitt Romney Inc. website).
::I don't see any source for this.  Not even Romney claims that he ended his term with lower taxes.  The state and local tax burden in Massachusetts increased from 10 percent to 10.6 percent of per capita income during Romney's governorship, according to analysis by the Tax Foundation.  The closest his website comes to saying that he lowered taxes is that "the state abolished a retroactive capital gains tax."  As explained in Governorship of Mitt Romney, this consisted of moving the effective date for a new capital gains tax from January 1, 2002 to January 1, 2003.  The legislature delaying a tax increase by one year at the beginning of his term would not cause him to end his term with lower taxes.
-Fagles 15:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That "deficit" is actually a forecasted budget deficit—Romney managed to balance the budget every year he was in office, according to the article you've provided, and the "deficit" is at least partly the responsibility of Romney's successor for restoring nearly half a billion dollars worth of programs Romney tried to cut.  The Jade Knight 20:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Campaign websites are considered a reliable source. And could you sign your messages? Antley 20:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable only in the sense that "this is what he said". Voice-of-All 18:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems with Governorship section: accuracy and POV

message: The governorship section remains a mess.  
I've proposed a revision focusing on what I think most people will agree are the three most important aspects of his governorship: fiscal policy, the healthcare legislation, and same-sex marriage.  It consists mainly of information copied from the Governorship of Mitt Romney article and significantly shortened. Please feel free to edit this proposed revision here on the talk page.  If it gets a positive response I will move it to the article.-Fagles 22:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft revision

message: Hello,
I'm Nick Moreau, an accredited reporter for Wikinews. I'm co-ordinating our 2008 US Presidential election interviews. We will be interviewing as many candidates as possible, from the Democrats, Republicans, and other parties/independents.
I'll be sending out requests for interviews to the major candidates very soon, but I want your input, as people interested in American politics: what should I ask them?
Please go to any of these three pages, and add a question.
* n:Wikinews:Story preparation/US 2008/Democratic Party
* n:Wikinews:Story preparation/US 2008/Republican Party
* n:Wikinews:Story preparation/US 2008/Third Party or Independent
Questions? Don't ask them here, I'll never see them. Either ask them on the talk page of any of these three pages, or e-mail me.
Thanks,
Nick
== Lack of sources in Governorship section ==
There is a huge lack of sources in the governorship section (only two or three, I think).  I added an  tag until we decide what to do. Joseph Antley 17:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: many references have now been added.  I think the tag should be removed.
== Father's place of birth ==
The fact that George Romney was born in Mexico is entirely appropriate to the page on George Romney, and is listed there. But to insert "Mexican-born" into the article on Mitt only inflames the passions of those who have an agenda when it comes to immigration. Mitt was born in Michigan. What else to you need to know? If you want to know about his father, go to his father's page. El Ojo 21:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed. And I moved this section to the bottom. Joseph Antley 21:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree with the change. Turtlescrubber 03:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions? Ask them through Wikinews 

message: The fact that George Romney was born in Mexico is entirely appropriate to the page on George Romney, and is listed there. But to insert "Mexican-born" into the article on Mitt only inflames the passions of those who have an agenda when it comes to immigration. Mitt was born in Michigan. What else to you need to know? If you want to know about his father, go to his father's page. El Ojo 21:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. And I moved this section to the bottom. Joseph Antley 21:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree with the change. Turtlescrubber 03:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Father's place of birth 

message: Mitt Romney's full name is Willard Mitt Romney not Willard Milton Romney (as the article states).  The name Mitt did come from a relative named Milton, who was referred to as "Mitt," but Mitt Romney's middle name is only Mitt.  I am changing the article to reflect this.
== Ultra High-net worth individual (UHNWI) ==
Mitt is a UHNWI (ultra-high net worth individual) as he's worth >$30M.  This is the top .007% of people in North America (18,700 people), and he's near the top of this list (likely 0.001%, but I can't find any references to this).  I think this is notable enough to include in the top of the article. Pro crast in a tor 21:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His estimated net-worth is already included.  I suppose you want to include his being in the top x% of Americans when it comes to wealth.  If you can find a source which would back it up, be bold and add it in.  New England Review Me! 22:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering he did not even come close to the Forbes 400 list of the richest people in the U.S., in my opinion his personal finances do not belong at the top of the article.  His net worth is already mentioned in the body. Alanraywiki 22:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text:  Ok, will remove this from the lede paragraph, but will add the .007% to the business section.  I looked at Kerry (worth $570M) and Schwartzenegger ($800M), and neither included this info in the top of the article. Pro crast in a tor 22:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This information was briefly blanked from the article by IP User:169.196.224.2. This IP is owned by Jefferies & Company, Inc. of Los Angeles according to ARIN.  Jeffries & Company has donated $2,300.00 to Mitt Romney's campaign according to the Federal Elections Commission. Fascinating... Eleland 18:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Milton vs. Mitt

message: Mitt is a UHNWI (ultra-high net worth individual) as he's worth >$30M.  This is the top .007% of people in North America (18,700 people), and he's near the top of this list (likely 0.001%, but I can't find any references to this).  I think this is notable enough to include in the top of the article. Pro crast in a tor 21:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His estimated net-worth is already included.  I suppose you want to include his being in the top x% of Americans when it comes to wealth.  If you can find a source which would back it up, be bold and add it in.  New England Review Me! 22:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering he did not even come close to the Forbes 400 list of the richest people in the U.S., in my opinion his personal finances do not belong at the top of the article.  His net worth is already mentioned in the body. Alanraywiki 22:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text:  Ok, will remove this from the lede paragraph, but will add the .007% to the business section.  I looked at Kerry (worth $570M) and Schwartzenegger ($800M), and neither included this info in the top of the article. Pro crast in a tor 22:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This information was briefly blanked from the article by IP User:169.196.224.2. This IP is owned by Jefferies & Company, Inc. of Los Angeles according to ARIN.  Jeffries & Company has donated $2,300.00 to Mitt Romney's campaign according to the Federal Elections Commission. Fascinating... Eleland 18:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultra High-net worth individual (UHNWI) 

message: I made a Josh Romney section, and someone deleted it. I think this man is noteworthy, he's been in the news because of his possible congressional run. I made section, citing my source as Deseret Moring News, and it was deleted, without explanation. Also, I put up a picture of Josh Romney on his wikipedia page, and that was deleted as well. I know people want to merge these articles, so why do you want Josh Romney not under the Mitt Romney page? Who keeps doing this and why? I feel as if my work is going down the drain.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooman456 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who Deleted my Josh Romney section and why?