Talk:Evan Dobelle

message: Dear Dobelle Booster,
Wikipedia is warts and all. Feel free to provide relevant links supporting your claims. I have done so with mine. If these are truly "scurrilous lies," Dobelle should sue the Hawaii Reporter. Even public figures can do so if the errors are uncorrected and promulgated with malice and "a reckless disregard for the truth," as U.S. libel law clearly allows.
Are you saying the Dobelle evaluation The Reporter cites is false? That would be pretty serious stuff and Dobelle should demand that it be taken down.
Chicagogood, stop responding with emotion. You're obviously a friend of Dobelle's. If you don't like the paragraph, then put a tag on this article questioning its neutrality or alerting readers to a reversion war. It's not hard to do. Oops, I've already done that but you keep taking that down, too.
Better yet, you could add a paragraph that you think would complete the story. But to cite Dobelle's accomplishments at Hawaii without acknowledging he left under a cloud is irresponsible.
As for sources, anyone who cites them does so "selectively," to use your term. You can't cite them all. And voter repudiation of the regents is hardly an affirmation of Dobelle's tenure. That's a classic example of a logical fallacy.
This is the paragraph you keep taking down:
However, in 2004 Dobelle was fired from his post as president of the University of Hawaii system for allegedly abusing his spending authority. The university later rescinded the firing and granted him a non-tenured professorship for two years as part of a settlement that led to his resignation as president.
Wiffer 21:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reread the Chronicle article... If I'm reading it correctly, the settlement included no finding of wrongdoing on either side- Dobelle's or the board's.  I've added this to the paragraph in question. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute

message: I have no dog in this fight.  I've never heard of Evan Dobelle, or hadn't until I noticed this disagreement while doing recent changes patrol.  Here's my opinion, for whatever it's worth.
*If the president of the University of Hawaii was fired, rehired, and paid off, that's a noteworthy part of his career and can reasonably be included here.
*However, the sources that are cited look rather biased, and I'd hate to hang a controversial paragraph on them.  If this happened as described, there would surely be some more neutral sources covering it?  If there aren't any sources more neutral than these, then I'd hesitate to include the paragraph, for fear that biased sources might be distorting what happened.
*WP:BLP reminds us to have an especially high standard for sources when adding potentially controversial material to the biography of a living person, not just because of the chances for lawsuit, but also because if the information turns out to be inaccurate, it could badly damage a person's career or reputation.
*There are lots of ways to deal with a content dispute- discussion on the talk page, asking for a third opinion, Request for Comment.  Constant reversions without any real attempt to seek consensus doesn't really achieve anything, because you can do that forever without coming to an agreement.  
*I don't have any special powers, or any authority to tell anyone what to do.  I'm just offering a third opinion for whatever it's worth, because the two of you appear to be at an impasse.
To sum up: I think that the paragraph in dispute needs to be sourced from a mainstream print newspaper or magazine source.  I think that if it can be, then it should stay, and if it can't be, then it should be deleted. That's my opinion. -FisherQueen (Talk) 01:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: My opinion

message: To Whom It May Concern:
I have edited the "Evan Dobelle" page for the first time in my Wikipedia history today and I post this to try and make it the last edit.
I noticed that content of this page has been rather highly contested and has a high rate of edit turn over, and I think it is time to end this.
As a fellow citizen of Hawaii, and as someone who is aware of but not an expert on Mr. Dobelle's tenure as president, I am rather disgusted with what's happening here.  To add inflammatory articles, personal attacks, and fraudulent personal accusations on Dobelle or someone close to him is far below what I thought was possible from most people.  I think this intense desire to dirty Dobelle's name and period in Hawaii is a huge waste of time and energy.  This type of anger and aggression shows to those of us who love Hawaii and all it stands for, that people out there are filled with the antithesis of what Aloha truly means and represents.  This type of bickering and use of slander is truly pathetic and illustrates how people do not understand the situation as a whole, or wish to. Rather, they are concerned about petty attacks and below the belt slander.
May I also remind whomever is involved that this is a neutral ground where information is to be recorded for those to learn about what has happened in the past.  I would strongly urge whoever is wasting their time with shallow attacks on someone who doesn't even know this discussion is going on, to cease immediately.  We insult Hawaii and the University by allowing this controversy to live on in such a negative form. 
Please, let's keep this neutral from now on. 
A Concerned Citizen of Hawaii,
DHR2002
Dhr2002 20:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Wars Need To Stop. 

message: I did twenty minutes of research.  It's clear that Dobelle was fired by the University of Hawaii, then reached a settlement with the university which involved his resigning the presidency in exchange for a nonteaching position and money.  This was covered by a significant number of reliable sources.  I've replaced the blog sources with stories in the Chronicle of Higher Education, which is a very reliable source.  This is a significant event in Dobelle's career, directly related to the areas for which he is notable.  The paragraph under question is in no way a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines regarding biographies of living persons.  There is no good reason to remove the paragraph.  There is no reason defensible by Wikipedia policy not to include this information in this article.  There are some accounts that seem to be making few edits other than this article.  That indicates a possible conflict of interest, and I want to remind everyone that if you are Evan Dobelle, a friend or relative of Evan Dobelle, or a member of the University of Hawaii board of regents, it is not appropriate for you to be editing this article.
If the three of you had spent the last three months developing this article more fully, using sources, instead of just reverting this one paragraph back and forth, it would be a featured article by now. -FisherQueen (Talk) 23:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The edit warring needs to stop now.

message: Do you have a reliable source- a real newspaper or journal article- to confirm the difference between your facts and the ones in the Chronicle of Higher Education articles?  Specifically, that the ultimate settlement was 3.8 million rather than 1.6 million dollars, that he was not barred from applying for other positions, and that the regents publicly stated that there was no wrongdoing? If there's updated information, it should be reflected here, but only if we can verify it with strong sources. -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reread the Chronicle article... If I'm reading it correctly, the settlement included no finding of wrongdoing on either side- Dobelle's or the board's.  I've added this to the paragraph in question. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 70.109.242.108

message: This is the talk page, where discussion happens.  You keep deleting the paragraph about Evan Dobelle's firing and settlement with the University of Hawaii.  This is something that happened, as you appear to agree.  As far as I can tell, you want to delete the whole section because you think that the regents were wrong to fire him.  But I can't tell exactly what you're thinking, because you won't discuss it anywhere but in edit summaries that assume that I already know what you're thinking, which I don't.  
I don't understand your edit summaries.  I don't understand why you are so convinced that Dobelle was not fired and then rehired in a settlement, when every source I've seen, including the ones you provided, says that he was.  Or maybe you believe that it happened, but think that since the regents were in the wrong, then we should all pretend it didn't happen.  Or maybe you believe that the whole thing was masterminded by ninjas, and if we write about it on Wikipedia, then the ninjas will descend on the nation and carry off every firstborn daughter.  I don't have any way to know, because you have not bothered to explain. 
If you'd like to discuss the section, I'm happy to.  But you are in the wrong for removing well-sourced information from the article without consensus from the Wikipedia community, and continuing to do so will result in your being blocked from editing.  -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: To the section blankers

message: Thanks for your hard work in clarifying this matter. It never ceases to amaze me that some people seem to think important -- if inconvenient -- truths should be expunged from a Wikipedia entry simply because they don't like them. Your impartial steadfastness is much appreciated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wiffer (talk • contribs) 02:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: To FisherQueen

message: Dr Dobelle, None of the material and qualifiers you inserted are sourced. You took down material that FisherQueen had carefully researched and sourced. Please find appropriate links to verify your assertions or I'm sure they will be taken down.
Wiffer 19:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing

message: I've asked for the page to be protected. Further information to be placed here as and when it comes. Drivenapart 10:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: The truth about what has been happening  has been found.  Leave the page as it is, or take it down.  —Preceding 
*Honolulu Advertiser, Tuesday, August 28, 2007, "Wikipedia slurs traced to Hawaii state PCs"
unsigned comment added by Manoaboy (talk • contribs) 04:18, August 29, 2007 (UTC) 
Actually, no. The details should remain as all the article says it that slurs were made, but it doesn't refer as to what details were slurs against Dobelle in particular, indeed it could also be referring to the removal of correct, sourced information from the article from anonymous sources. As a result the information will be put back on until sourced information can be placed to say the facts displayed within the article are factually incorrect. Drivenapart 08:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Truth Is Found 

message: An image used in this article, File:Esobelle.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Esobelle.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: The page should probably have a section about his firing from WSU separate from "career and education." I'm going to add one, but a smarter person should probably step up and fix it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.159.182.241 (talk) 07:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  There should probably be a section about him leaving WSU 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Evan Dobelle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727130135/http://www.normansakamoto.org/policy/20070724_UHBoardofRegentsCandidateAdvisoryCouncil.shtml to http://www.normansakamoto.org/policy/20070724_UHBoardofRegentsCandidateAdvisoryCouncil.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205406/http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/The%20Chronicle%20of%20Higher%20Education.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/The%20Chronicle%20of%20Higher%20Education.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205406/http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/The%20Chronicle%20of%20Higher%20Education.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/The%20Chronicle%20of%20Higher%20Education.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205412/http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/Philadelphia.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/SOOCPRESS/Philadelphia.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205417/http://www.evandobelle.com/Dobelle%20Again%20Remaking%20A%20City.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/Dobelle%20Again%20Remaking%20A%20City.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051215115945/http://www.newenglandfutures.org/issues/newenglandidentity/sidebar3/ to http://newenglandfutures.org/issues/newenglandidentity/sidebar3/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205424/http://www.evandobelle.com/United%20for%20Learning%20Hawaii.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/United%20for%20Learning%20Hawaii.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710205435/http://www.evandobelle.com/TRINITY%20Learning%20Corridor.pdf to http://www.evandobelle.com/TRINITY%20Learning%20Corridor.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: — Wsk0447 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 21:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single-purpose editing 

message: Not sure edits by User:Saltcity10244 are neutral. See this diff - source does reflect one of the allegations user has removed, "lavish spending on travel". Explanation for removal is given as "Removed statement about travel. Not supported by the source. The fundraising trip was well-received according to citations" - but this citation does not in fact support this. Can we discuss? Tacyarg (talk) 19:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality