Talk:Vernon Jones

message: This page seems to be only promoting Vernon Jones instead of discusing his political career.  Perhaps it comes from a strict supporter of the CEO?
Auburnirishman 01:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I concur. This article mentions nothing about the CEOs two rape allegations, or anything else about the continued destruction and discrediting of his administration. I live too close to this idiot to be unbiased, so I'll leave the editing to someone who doesn't completely hate him. A simple google search will reveal a lot of juicy and scandalous information, so get ready to get on your high horse. Don't forget to read about his controversial hiring of disgraced Dallas police chief Terrell Bolton, that's a good one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grufti (talk • contribs) 03:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with this stuff is Jones has never even been indicted on any of it. I'm surprised there isn;t a decent source on the allegations but I guess maybe papers like the ajc don't want to tackle it because it's all still rumor. If you want to defeat Jones... do what I;m doing and get your friends who wouldn't normally vote in a primary to vote for Jim Martin. You never know... it may make a difference.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

text: But your comment misses my point... the newspapers aren't reporting it because it's all just allegations... if you can find a decent source... then put the allegations in there... otherwise don't. This is the rule with wikipedia.--Dr who1975 (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Paste your potential changes here... I'll look them over and add them now if I think they fit into wikipedia rules.--Dr who1975 (talk) 14:37, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

text: The wording needs a little bit of work to be less POV... I also need to check the sources myself... I'll see what I can do tonight.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I got busy with work... I may try to revisit this in a fair way in the future. It should be less controversial now that Jones is out of the election.--67.62.103.180 (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uhmm, thanks for nothing Office of Vernon Jones. 

message: Main article: Georgia United States Senate election, 2008
On 23 March 2007 Jones announced he was running for the United States Senate against incumbent Republican Saxby Chambliss.
In campaign literature, Jones’ campaign sent out a flier in which he appears in a picture next to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama with the words "Yes We Can." However, Obama himself stated he not only never posed with Jones (the picture had been digitally altered), he did not endorse Jones for the Democratic nomination for Senate. In response, Jones blamed his "liberal opponents backed by the liberal media" for trying to ruin his campaign.
Jones has also received criticism for the appearance of the tagline "VOTE Vernon Jones for GA Senate" on tickets, produced using county funds, for the Dekalb County Blues and Jazz Festival. The company who printed the tickets, supporters of Jones' campaign, have taken responsibility for the incident.
I know a lot of this probably hasn't been cited correctly, but I tried my best. I took out the stuff that is most definitely rumors. I also think the article needs to include a picture of Jones himself and a picture of the controversial flier. I've provided links to both:
Jones: http://www.northfultondemocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/vernon.jpg
Flier: https://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2008/07/03/vernon_obama.html
--LovesPolitics9
:The wording needs a little bit of work to be less POV... I also need to check the sources myself... I'll see what I can do tonight.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I got busy with work... I may try to revisit this in a fair way in the future. It should be less controversial now that Jones is out of the election.--67.62.103.180 (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 8 U.S. Senate campaign

message: While I completely agree these are probably some of the reasons he lost the election, this statement is pure opinion:
Jones' admission to voting for President Bush twice, along with donating to the Republican Party are likely reasons for his defeat to Jim Martin.
As a result, I removed it from the page. 
Additionally, I added Jones' admission of voting for Bush back into the US Senate Campaign section with a citation. LovesPolitics9 (talk) 22:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had left that after removing other fluff that was on the article, and my mistake for not checking for citations.  I think this whole article needs major rewriting, since all of it is about controversies.  Just look at the "2008 Senate Campaign" section.  The first sentence is his announcement to run, then after that it's all criticism/claims he is actually a Republican.  I am currently gathering sources and information and plan on completely revamping this page sometime this evening.  I am hoping others will contribute and expand the article while keeping with WP:BLP.  Cwagmire (talk) 20:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Additions

message: I just finished revising the article to include Jones' stance on many issues, as well trying to move the controversies into the other sections.  Any feedback on the new parts of the article, as well as areas that still need changing would be appreciated. Cwagmire (talk) 23:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think I tried to add "'posititve' aspects," just facts.  And as per the negative aspects, I think they belong in there just not in a section labeled controversies (see Barack Obama and John McCain for how I think they should be done).  You also said these additions are "'overkill'" because his office is not of huge significance, then you say the negatives are important because he decided to run for a "significant political office."  This somewhat doesn't make sense to me;  The entire reason I put those issues in is because he ran for national office, as most of those deal with his opinion of the federal government's job and not DeKalb County's, so I think we somewhat agree here.  I tried to base the issues section on those of other senator's wikipedia pages, since Jones was running ultimately to become a Senator.  And for full disclosure, I did not vote for Jones, nor did I vote for any of his opponents, I voted for Chambliss.  I think the article has a NPOV, though I would just prefer the controversies into the writing instead of bullet point style, and I think the issues I included are important considering his decision to run for a senate seat, although if there is strong disagreement I wouldn't be opposed to moving them all into a new article (such as "political positions of Vernon Davis") and only putting a paragraph in his bio like you suggested.  Cwagmire (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I made an article with all his political positions (called "Political positions of Vernon Jones") and changed the issues section to reveal a small paragraph.  I hope this is more in line with what you proposed. Cwagmire (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New revision 

message: I was asked if my sources more reliable after making an effort to rewrite an article.  I used some of the very same references that was used by the edits before I made my rewrites.  If something is FALSE and you rewrite to reflect such, why would that be deleted?  The information I changed was from a more reliable source and sometimes the same source.  Why are the edits not being allowed if we can prove the information is false?
First paragraph: 
Jones was found guilty of racial discrimination in a federal lawsuit upheld on appeal in 2009. 
This is a false statement and should be REMOVED. I cited the AJC as a reference.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/dekalb-discrimination-suit-jones-ordered-to-pay/nQdqL/Genesis20 78 (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the "Bryant v Jones" reference as part of my work updating all bare URL references in the Controversies section. That is not a filing document; it is the 11th Circuit Court decision, signed by federal appeals court judge Gerald Bard Tjoflat. Carl Henderson (talk) 22:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

text: I also updated the "Jones was found guilty of racial..." to the more accurate (and source supported), "While DeKalb County was found liable for racial discrimination, the jury rejected those claims against Jones, but held that he had "created and maintained a hostile work environment." Of the original four plaintiffs against Jones and the County, only two were rewarded damages." Carl Henderson (talk) 22:51, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Understanding rewrites being rejected 

message: Please avoid bare URLs in references, or references consisting of only a URL and a title. Due to link rot, over time such references are more and more likely to vanish from the web, making it impossible to check or update them. I've started expanding the bare URLs in this article (and have done Controversy section). Carl Henderson (talk) 22:48, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please avoid bare URLs in references 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I would like to suggest a section which would chronological cite references of Trumps embrace, endorsement of him. Wikipietime (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emboldened to Trump 

message: From 1993 to 2001 Vernon Jones served as a Republican Party Pilitician in the Georgia House of Representatives. However in the same paragraph it states Vernon Jones as a member of the Democratic Party served in the Georgia House of Rep. from 1993 to 2001. How is that possible? 173.68.197.131 (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  dates dont add up