Talk:Johnny Sutton

message: I have restored a section with an official response to sutton's lies from CONGRESSMAN DANA ROHRBACHER'S OFFICE.
Can we express that he is a huge ass for being one of those rare government officials trying to destroy America?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.232.99 (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you can't write it that way. This is an excyclopedia. You may try to explain that certain interest groups are not content with the subject's handling of particular issues. For example, have there been calls to remove this US Attorney? Why wasn't he removed? Who favors him (difficult to evidence)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.140.59 (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Write it in a neutral way. If you want to state that it's a rebuttal to what he's said that's fine. To call his comments "lies" without it being anything more than your opinion, violates the WP:NPOV policy. Leebo T/C 14:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Stop assuming bad faith about the other users involved. It is impossible to resolve a dispute if you're going to resort to calling names and slinging mud before the discussion has even began. Repeated incivility can lead to a temporary loss of editing privileges. Leebo T/C 20:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what the hell you are babbling about, but i would suggest you take some meds and chill out for awhile. If you regain your senses, please become familiar with how Wiki works and then maybe try again IN HERE. Seriously, what's up here ?!? Thanks, --Tom (talk) 20:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He has been blocked for 24 hours for continuing to edit war on this article. Leebo T/C 20:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Leebo, I will try not to edit war, I was just trying to revert to the last "stable" version. If Fixtheboarder wants to work on the talk page and stop accusing folks of whitwashing or whatever, I would be happy to try to help. Anyways, Cheers!--Tom (talk) 20:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of sourced material

message: ===Comments===
I somehow came across this article and made this edit [] to remove POV, specifically calling a living person a liar without a source.  Then I started watching the article and looking at the other POV issues within the aarticle and found many of them and removed or asked for citations.  The article then became a battleground for what material belongs.  I posted the article to the Living Person message board and submitted the RfC to get others to look at this and decide what is appropriate.    Jons63 (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Appropriate Material?

message: I somehow came across this article and made this edit [] to remove POV, specifically calling a living person a liar without a source.  Then I started watching the article and looking at the other POV issues within the aarticle and found many of them and removed or asked for citations.  The article then became a battleground for what material belongs.  I posted the article to the Living Person message board and submitted the RfC to get others to look at this and decide what is appropriate.    Jons63 (talk) 20:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: *I've removed orphaned article status.  Articles that link here include:
Narco News, United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Ignacio Ramos,Gilmer Hernandez, Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys,  House of Death, and Sutton (surname)
Deatonjr (talk) 22:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Orphaned Article Status 

message: I have tried to add more specific concerns below. I broke them out by paragraph to make it easier to stay on track as the conversation about each subject.  I took these out of Fixthepedia's edit of 15:08, 30 November 2007,   Jons63 (talk) 03:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More Specific Concerns

message: The prosecution of David Sipe was not done by Sutton or Sutton's office.  It is not pertinent to a biography of Sutton. It should not be reinserted into the article, unless a direct connection to Sutton can be shown. Jons63 (talk) 02:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Sipe 

message: He was successfully prosecuted, are we going to add into the article everyone who was successfully prosecuted by Sutton.  The information does not state any significance of the prosecution.  Nor does it give any citations for the minimal information in the paragraph.  Jons63 (talk) 03:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hernandez 

message: The paragraph has no mention of Sutton.  Why is it in an article about Sutton?  Jons63 (talk) 03:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel it belongs, write it so that it tells the reader that, as it is written, it says nothing about Sutton and doesn't belong, I will remove it.  Jons63 (talk) 22:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gary Brugman 

message: Congressman and former trial judge Ted Poe has officially accused Sutton of affirmatively allowing Aldrete-Davila to commit perjury as well: .  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixthepedia (talk • contribs) 14:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These are still just people accusing him of this, no criminal charges.  It does not belong in the article.   Jons63 (talk) 03:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Accusations of Perjury

message: "An illegal alien concealed in the van was wounded was wounded in the cheek."
Can someone clean up this sentence please.Reinoe (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: .—Random832 18:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup Please 

message: The page is now unprotected; as per the unprotection note, I would like to ask what objections people have to the sourced and verifiable information that was proposed in this collection of edits.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maha Pizza (talk • contribs) 22:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it's now April 8th and no response I am assuming nobody objects.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maha Pizza (talk • contribs) 01:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: WorldNetDaily and libertypost.com are not reliable sources (see WP:V for criteria) and should not be used as sources, especially not in biographies. -- ChrisO (talk) 07:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but one is linked to Fox News with WND listings only as backups; the other while listed to Liberty Post is a direct quotation and verifiable. Also, why did you not respond earlier, and why do you insist on prejudicial attacks like "worldnutdaily" in your edit summary?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maha Pizza (talk • contribs) 12:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've only just come across the article. WND has been discussed before on the reliable sources noticeboard and the consensus (with which I agree) is that it's an unreliable source. It doesn't matter that the Liberty Post item is a direct quotation - because the publication it comes from is unreliable, we can't verify it properly and we can't use it. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is now unprotected 

message: This article goes beyond POV into libel.  It's fine if someone's POV is that Sutton has engaged in criminal misconduct, but to state that as fact when it is not true and a reasonable person would know it isn't true is libel. Don't Be Evil (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libel 

message: It looks like this page was once more actively edited than it is now; unfortunately, stability is not the same thing as quality, and I think any objective editor would agree this falls far short of Wikipedia's BLP guidelines. It's my intent to improve this article: restating in neutral terms relevant facts with quality sources, while removing poorly-sourced, contentious material. In particular, the sections on the "House of Death" case as well as "Ramos and Compean" need significant work. Also worth noting: Johnny Sutton currently works for the law firm of John Ashcroft, with whom my employer worked earlier this year (I also proposed several successful changes to Mr. Ashcroft's page at that time). Therefore I have a potential conflict of interest. However, I invite anyone to follow my edits, and I am more than happy to discuss how best to represent this article. Just drop me a line on my Talk page. NMS Bill (talk) 15:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just revisited this article again to remove what I believe are obvious or probable BLP violations, particularly regarding the "House of Death" case. The article is still not a good one, and I intend to do some research and improve it further in the coming weeks. I don't expect to introduce anything controversial, but I'll be especially careful with any changes to the Ramos and Compean section, as that has clearly been a point of contention in the past. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A few months and a great deal of research and writing later, I have posted a near-total rewrite of the article. There is now much more detail and information about significant events in Mr. Sutton's public career, including his baseball career and a few notable cases. In addition, the Compean-Ramos trial is now told a bit more straightforwardly, while the perspectives of key sides in the controversy are preserved. Through the process, I did converse with Mr. Sutton and he is aware of what I have done here, though the writing and all editorial decisions are solely mine. If anyone has questions about this new version, please let me know. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 15:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added clarifications and citations to the house of death section, which, I agree, was rather unclear and hazy, and lacking in references. It's a pretty important (and understandably controversial) issue that's received a fairly large amount of media coverage. I'm not sure that we need to say "according to the Independent (UK)" at the top of the section though, we can simply cite them instead (after all, they aren't at all the only ones who have covered this and asserted similar things). Along those lines, I already fixed the fact that words like "allegedly" and "accused" were used only sparingly in the earlier version of this article, and taking care on that front (as well as using references) should rectify the BLP issues. Again, we need to keep in mind that Sutton was not legally found to be at fault, though he was strongly criticized by at least one professor, a former Congresswoman, and host of journalists; that is to say, he wasn't officially reprimanded or penalized for his actions by anyone in the government. As such, we should make sure to be clear on what is alleged, what are "accusations" or "criticisms," and what are public facts (such as the legal proceedings of the Santillan case, the documented DoJ knowledge of the ongoing narco-cemetary operations and their informant's involvement). 173.3.41.6 (talk) 06:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bringing this page in line with BLP guidelines 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Johnny Sutton. 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/20061102190758/http://dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4519632 to http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4519632
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100108160035/http://www.ashcroftgroupllc.com/ourteam/johnny-sutton/ to http://www.ashcroftgroupllc.com/ourteam/johnny-sutton/
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) 10:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Johnny Sutton. 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/20110728090506/http://www.texaslyceum.org/news_view.aspx?ArticleId=18 to http://www.texaslyceum.org/news_view.aspx?ArticleId=18
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091130195025/http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Compean.con.pdf to http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Compean.con.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/MYSA030407_01A_usattorneystory_369805f_html21601.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100531183331/http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Badges%20of%20Honor.pdf to http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/Compean-Ramos/Badges%20of%20Honor.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) 10:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified