Talk:Mark Kennedy (politician)

message: Is this section really worth having in the article?  It seems very minor to me, and if there aren't similar instances, what's the point?  John Broughton 19:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just a fact. It shows how close to the 'party line' he is. If this is 'good' or 'bad' is up to the person reading to decide. The fact check smart vote survey is the same thing, it's just a fact. -Ravedave 23:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: He is in a state who voted for the democratic president for the last eleventy-billion elections. What are NRA/NARAL? -Ravedave 14:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I found a valid reason to keep the voting % in. His campaign commercial claims that he crosses party lines to get things done. 98% makes it seem like thats pretty shakey. -Ravedave 00:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact-check controversy

message: An anonymous IP apparently asked what original research was. Here's a link to the page on original research: Wikipedia:No original research. Andjam 14:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No original research 

message: As far as I can tell, this Mark Kennedy link does not state that this ad was the first attack ad in the campaign. Andjam 13:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone supplies a reliable source stating that he made the first attack ad in the campaign (as opposed to, say, his opponent(s)), I'd be happy to hear about it. Andjam 13:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  He is an article calling kennedy's ad an attack ad  Can you find one stating that klocubar has released an attack ad? No, you can't, because she hasn't released one. Therefore the logical conclusion is that kennedy released the 1st attack ads. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 14:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless you have a reliable source stating that she hasn't released one, you're engaging in original research. Andjam 21:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. I'll keep my eye out for major news flashes such as "Klochubar doesn't release attack ads" and "earth doesn't explode" and "sun still shining". You may want to update the water article to not say it's wet since there isn't a reference and that would be original research. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 00:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  All you'd have to find is an article from a reliable source about the attack ad that mentions that it's the first such ad in the race. With regards to water, the article doesn't actually state in the article that it is wet. Andjam 01:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed verification 

message: Is it possible to improve the quality of the picture. It is very blurry. 24.5.166.84
: Fixed, I uploaded a larger version from the source. force your browser to refresh and it will be better. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 19:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: Mark Kennedy defeated David Minge in the 2nd District. In 2002, however, he ran for the 6th District (due to reapportionment) and replaced Bill Luther. Since the box clearly states that his information is for the 6th Congressional District (his current seat), the information in the box should be reflective of that. I am modifying the box to correctly list Bill Luther as his predecessor. This also matches the information found in Minnesota's 6th congressional district. Justin Bacon 06:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Preceded By

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mark Kennedy (politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090114193944/http://ustr.gov/assets/Who_We_Are/Advisory_Committee_Lists/asset_upload_file209_5865.pdf to http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Who_We_Are/Advisory_Committee_Lists/asset_upload_file209_5865.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:01, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article was a disjointed and discordant amalgam of uncited praise and poorly-cited obloquy. I have deleted the latter-- about 20% of the article critical of his tenure at UND, reciting such outrages as increases in the cost of parking. (The majority came from on IP associated with off-campus housing in Grand Forks.)  I have, where indicated, added requests for citations for the former.
I have no interest in the subject, but do have an interest in solid and well-sourced content in Wikipedia, in contrast to the embarrassment this article had become.  I will remove content without adequate sourcing and leave only a bare-bones biography if these defects are not corrected.  Kablammo (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone and sourcing