Talk:Tuttle, Oklahoma

message: Straw poll vote: should this article make mention of the incident between the city manager and the CentOS development team?  Please vote keep if you believe the reference should be kept, or remove if you believe the reference should be removed.  Please sign your vote by including four tildes after your vote.
* Keep, for reasons stated above. — WCityMike (T | C) 21:40, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  An exploding whale (note: featured article!) is far more notable than Jerry Taylor! Note the foot on the Slashdot story, it's 'Oddly Enough' even on Slashdot and plenty of stuff makes even the serious parts of Slashdot that doesn't belong here. (I saw it first on Slashdot myself.) No lawsuit, nothing, just an obnoxious email exchange from a manager who got out the wrong side of the bed and doesn't understand computers. It's a funny story that will be forgotten within a week. For the moment, as someone has gone and created an article for Jerry, I hope no-one minds me reducing the mention to a single line with link? (As per the exploding whale!) Even if it isn't forgotten within the week, and Jerry becomes some sort of cult figure (and with that photo...) the place for this is still in his article. -- Blorg 23:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Forgotten within a week?" Je me souviens!  In fact, I am hoping that "tuttle" will enter the jargon file, or some new, relavant, incarnation of that document.  But point well taken, Mr. Blorg. In fact, you argue it so well that I am pained to have to dissagree with you.  I tell you what, if things have quieted down here within, say, a month, you can just quietly make the change you propose and no one will notice.  And I even promise, that if _I_ notice, I won't object.  --VonWoland 20:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw Poll 

message: WCityMike (in Edit Summary): "Ignorantly" and "rudely"? Come on!
: I do prefer your original paragraph that you've put back there, but I don't think anyone could deny either that Mr Taylor was rude or, given his supposed position and the very clear text on the unexpected page, that he behaved ignorantly on that occasion.
: Unrelatedly, I do think it's worth explicitly stating that the problem had nothing to do with CentOS - I don't think this is immediately clear to non-technical readers. PeteVerdon 15:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a similar interpertation of his actions, but WP:NPOV#Another_example puts it well. In this context, we don't need to say he was rude, the emails speak for themselves. Related to your unrelated point, I agree it isn't very clear that Centos didn't contribute to the problem, I'll try and think of a better way of putting it (but I'll post the suggestsion on the talk page first to avoid potential edit disputes) Regards, MartinRe 18:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As things stood before you re-inserted your summary paragraph, the emails couldn't speak for themselves because they weren't linked to. The one-sentence summary was there mostly to introduce a link to the Jerry Taylor page, but it was so bald that the average reader was IMO unlikely to bother to follow the link. Anyway, this is all academic now - your summary is (barring a few tweaks) the right thing here as far as I'm concerned. PeteVerdon 19:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Possible re-wording: Instead of "Despite attempts to convince Taylor..." which might be read that there was really a problem, and they were just trying to convince him there wasn't, how about re-writing it as "Despite being informed that it was simply a common misconfiguration by their website's host, Taylor remained unconvinced and threatened to call the FBI". Comments? MartinRe 23:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds more neutral -- although I don't think it adequately conveys that there were numerous attempts to explain things to him, all of which he blindly ignored. — WCityMike (T | C) 02:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about "Despite being informed <B>repeatedly</b> that..." then? MartinRe 08:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but really, which phrasing do you think carries more POV to it?  "Despite attempts to convince Taylor ... " or "Despite being informed repeatedly that it was simply a common misconfiguration by their website's host ..."  The latter does, I think, which makes it unideal as a replacement.  Also, the grammar of the phrasing is a little weird, as there's some noun-verb stuff going on. — WCityMike (T | C) 17:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

text: (de-indeted for readability) I do like the tuttletimes way of putting it as "... threats for a problem he didn’t cause and really had no obligation to fix", which might be a good final phrase. I still find it hard to believe, that after finding out that the real problem was, that he still states that threatening an innocent, unrelated, person who was trying to be helpful with the FBI was justified, unless that's a matter of trying to save face. Also hard to believe (or maybe not!), is that after this incident showing the level of comptence of the city manager, the Mayor admitted that "the city manager knows a lot more about computers than he does". Also, with the amount of coverage this has got, it may be worth making a full paragraph of the incident, rather than just a triva note. MartinRe 20:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ignorant and Rude 

message: New: Related issue?  There WAS a Jerry Taylor entry on Wikipedia last night, but it appears to have disappeared with no history record.  Ayone know what happened?
:Yeah.  I submitted it for speedy deletion, and the admins zapped it.  The article as written was a maliciously vitriolic attack piece (and this is coming from the person who first added the Taylor "trivia" to this page) and frankly Taylor could've probably sued Wikipedia for libel if he had a mind to.  Taylor isn't notable enough to stand on his own.  If you disagree, you can question the speedy deletion at Wikipedia:Speedy deletions, but I think it was entirely founded. — WCityMike (T | C) 02:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Deletion review is at WP:DRV#Jerry_Taylor. To me the speedy was justifible under a combination of A6 and A7 of WP:CSD Regards, MartinRe 08:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy Deletion of Jerry Taylor Entry

message: Wikipedia does not intend to provide an exhaustive list of all the farms in town (verifiable or not), so I removed that feature of the second Geography section before I redistributed its content.Wyzyrd 02:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Exhaustive listing of farms in Tuttle

message: I have renamed the CentOS Incident to "Controversy Regarding the City Manager", because the section has expanded to include incidents beyond CentOS.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgl168 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy section

message: Someone moved mention of Jason White to an "outstanding citizens" section and then added mention of someone named Brandon Golf without opening discussion on the matter.  I've never heard of Brandon Golf, and since there is no reference, this smacks of self-promotion.  Regardless, because the idea of "outstanding" is very subjective, such a listing should be reserved only for well-known (i.e., nationally recognized) people.  Also, such a list should be formatted like similar lists on other City articles.  These changes can be reverted if there is substantial support for making Tuttle's list different from everyone else's.64.250.208.53 (talk) 03:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Outstanding Citizens section