Talk:Jon Corzine

Info box and succession box

We've got a potential edit war about how to refelct his status as Governor elect in the info box and succession box. We're having a similar problem with Tim Kaine. Can we discuss here and reach consensus rather than changing back and forth? TMS63112 21:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC) (forgot to sign)

I'm sure this issue has been worked out before, but it only seems logical to use succession when that person takes office. I believe that's the standard we used for Christine Gregoire and Dino Rossi during their incredibly close race in 2004. I think a succession footnote explaining what will be happening is totally reasonable. Velvetsmog 21:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

But isn't it presuming too much, that Codey will complete the term, and that Corzine will be alive to assume the Governorship? Look at what happend in Florida ,it was assumed Jeb Bush would succeed Lawton Chiles as governor. Chiles died (Dec.98) before Bush's inauguration (Jan.99) ,making Buddy MacKay the successoer to Chiles not Bush Mightberight/wrong 22:36, 9 November 2005.

I think we're in agreement here. Succession box should be for current state of the world, footnotes for any special notes, including the 99% common case for succession between elections. Velvetsmog 23:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. I wish good health to the retiring Governors & the Governors-Elect of New Jersey & Virginia. Mightberight/wrong 0:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Carla Katz

Someone keeps adding, in the section of Marriage and Divorce, a statement that Jon Corzine "got Carla Katz pregnant than forced her to have an abortion." This is, of course, a variant on a vicious, unproven rumor launched against Senator Corzine. If you have proof about this, show it. Since you don't, stop adding it.

I completely agree... It's starting to get very annoying. Either prove your comments or stop adding/vandalizing... fdewaele

Title of Acting Governor

Donald DiFrancesco and Richard Codey are now officially titled Governor, rather than Acting Governor. [1] —chair lunch dinner™ (talk)

True, thus Corzine will be the 54th Governor of New Jersey rather than the 52nd. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 11:12, Jan. 14, 2006

Are you sure about the numbering? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aronk (talk • contribs) 13:56, Jan 14, 2006 (UTC)

This press release confirms it. —chair lunch dinner™ (talk) 20:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Acts section and cuts

I moved the paragraph around a bit [2] moving the cut to the Governor's School of New Jersey to the end of the paragraph and removing "one of his most controversial cuts..." that came before it. The reason is because I think most New Jersey residents would agree that his most "controversial" part of his budget has been to raise the sales tax and with regards to cuts there are several cuts to unique programs which have been considered "controversial" and I do not see what is different about this program.--Jersey Devil 10:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Seriousness of the surgery

The breaks are major and pose more risk of death than for hip replaecment where people his age sometimes die. That's the reason Codey asked for prayers. While doctors publicly say they expect him to recover, they also stress how difficult and long it would be. They are downplaying the risk of death in the ensuing surgeries. Please have a doctor or med student with expertise give a cite or referenced idea as to how serious the injuries reported typically are. Thanks. Chivista 20:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

"Corzinewatch" ?

Do we need that? I'm wary of PoV blogSPAM showing up here, especially with the recent budget buissiness... 68.39.174.238 01:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed it.--Jersey Devil 22:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Religion, infobox

Isn't he a Methodist? Also, what template can we use to reflect his Senate service as well? Biruitorul 02:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

"Confab"

I am deleting my own entry since I am slighty deranged adult whose behavior would fit nicely in a second grade class. Besides, doesn't "I'm a loser" have a nice ring to it ?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.197.130.151 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

Car accident

NBC has just reported his leg was broken and it was a hit-and-run. I'm searching for links now.71.175.17.80 23:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

MSNBC is reporting that Don Imus is at the Governor's mansion for a meeting with the Rugters University girls. Interesting this happens tonight. Wonder if that can be entered into the article somehow.ChaseS08 23:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The Car accident is listed twice in the article, with the second mentioning containing more depth. Someone should clean this up (I would if I had the time). Tvh2k 14:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I originally moved the paragraph from the lead, and put it to its own section so it would be expanded. I guess nobody saw it, and created their own. Sorry, I am on my way out and cannot do a merge myself. —Zachary ^talk 15:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I not technically proficient so hopefully someone will understand what merge means. Chivista 15:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Assassination Attempt? Come now, I guess whoever wrote that never tried driving on the NJ turnpike. -cplradar still having log in problems.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, NOT a newspaper. While it's appropriate to include recent and current events in it when applicable, I think that the section on the accident is inappropriately large and contains features that are really not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. I am going to scale it back a little by deleting some material, please feel free to scale it back more. Personally, I think that it would not benefit the article most to delete almost all the material and wait for events to unfold. Details like the particular hospital, doctors name, etc. I think are going way too far. Cazort 16:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

News paper reports that driver was getting email while driving

The stories say that the trooper was involved in a sexual affair with the wife of the emailer. Chivista 01:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't possibly believe that both of the vehicle's front seat occupants had major lapses of reason when prioritizing their respective activities! But then again, what an inspring a story this may yet turn out to be! Just picture it...

The state trooper was busy dealing with pictures on his cell phone sent by the husband of the woman with whom he was having an affair while driving 90+ MPH on the interstate at the probable behest of the Governor, who, although not wearing a seatbelt, was in an incredible hurry to get to an important political summit where he was to host a dispute between a talkshow host and a basketball team.

I'm glad both our elected officials and our public safety personnel take their positions so seriously and exercise such demonstrably sound judgment, even when it comes down to the little things like prioritizing the activities of the state's highest officeholder or protecting the safety of families with children who are traveling on the state's roadways. I sleep well at night knowing there are people of such caliber within our government who truly have the best interests of the public in their hearts! But I digress...

Information about the driver's alleged use of (and alleged reason for the use of) a mobile phone immediately prior to the crash probably ought to be added to the article (at least eventually, if not right now). Incidentally, is it illegal in New Jersey to use a "non-hands-free" mobile phone while driving? -Grammaticus Repairo 05:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

-So let me get this straight. The speed limit is 65, and even considering that in reality the flow of traffic would have been around 75, what in gods name was the trooper doing going even 15 over that WITH emergency flashing lights on?? It all just dosent make sense to me, and sounds like we are really missing bits and pieces of information. If traffic is moving at ~75 and he was cutting these cars off at ~90 with emergency lights on, (in a 2 lane section of the parkway as well) how could the trooper not be entirely at fault here?.. Any word on him even getting ticketed??

Residence Hoboken

Thanks for the reference! Chivista 18:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Chicago?

Why is this article a part of Wikiproject Chicago? Does the fact that he obtained a degree from the University of Chicago (and once worked in a Chicago bank) make him worthy of inclusion? This does not make sense to me... -Grammaticus Repairo 20:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

This person is of extreme importance to select Chicagoans. More precisely, he is an extremely important member of the University of Chicago alumni network. Probably, most students in the business school, law school public policy school probably aspire to one of his current or past roles. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 15:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Special pleading. None of the actual phrasing below would include every successful UChicago alumnus, which would be required to include Corzine. Please remove this tag. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Having attended college in a city is not sufficient in and of itself to demonstrate a connection between th individual and that city. I was baffled when the WikiProject Chicago tag popped up here and I still see no reason that it should be retained. Alansohn 01:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The arguments for including Jon Corzine in this project, as presented by Tony the Tiger, are simply absurd:

"This person is of extreme importance to select Chicagoans."

So are Socrates, Anna Nicole Smith, and Ernie the Keebler Elf. Given the population of the greater Chicago area, I'd imagine that damn near everyone with a wikipedia entry is "of extreme importance" to some "select Chicagoan".

"More precisely, he is an extremely important member of the University of Chicago alumni network."

Says whom and using what criteria? Do you have a valid source for this claim?

"Probably, most students in the business school, law school public [, and/or] policy school probably aspire to one of his current or past roles."

Aside from the sheer absurdity of this claim, the sentence contains the modifier "probably" (twice), essentially rendering everything within the phrase completely meaningless. And if there's a survey out there that substantiates this claim, I'd like to see it. Unless a valid reason is provided for keeping this page marked as within the scope of your wikiproject, I'm quite sure the tag will continue to be removed. Incidentally, I suspect the 'Priority Scale' chart displayed below is also likely to disappear. -Grammaticus Repairo 01:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject article importance scheme

Importance	Criteria	Example
Top	Do not give this rating to any Chicago Project article without first getting Project team consensus. Subject matter is a must-have for any encyclopedia, and would be highly associated with Chicago or Chicagoland. Examples would be certain Hall of Fame athletes, world class institutions, important national politicians, world class buildings or structures, or must-see tourist attractions. For instance, Michael Jordan is rated Top-importance because as an elite basketball player in Chicago, his accomplishments have also affected and inspired people worldwide. On the other hand, an athlete who plays briefly in Chicagoland before going on to a Hall of Fame career does not count. An example of this would be Dominik Hasek, who has been honored extensively for his hockey accomplishments, but has played for several teams after the Blackhawks. The subject's role as a Chicagoan or person associated with Chicagoland must also be emphasized. This is easily seen at President Barack Obama, who even though he was born in Hawaii, his article is rated Mid-importance by the Hawaii WikiProject and Top-importance by the Chicago WikiProject. (Note that since this project covers all of Cook County and Chicagoland related articles, the words "Chicago" and "Chicagoland" may be used interchangeably in this documentation.)	Chicago
High	Must have had (1) a large impact on Chicagoans and an impact on non-Chicagoans, across a couple of generations in a role as a person associated with Chicagoland or as a Chicagoland institution, or (2) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans and an impact on Chicagoans. Subject contributes a depth of knowledge. Examples would be National Register of Historic Places listings in Chicago, any currently serving U.S. Congressmen from Chicagoland, important Chicago athletes, or important institutions.	Chicago Board of Trade Building
Mid	Must have had a role that was (1) important to Chicagoans as a person or institution associated with Chicagoland, (2) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans, but a limited role to Chicagoans, (3) of moderate local, national and/or international importance. Subject fills in more minor details. Examples would be interesting buildings, personalities or architectural elements, or nationally prominent individuals who did not play a significant role as Chicagoans before rising to such prominence. Many current and recent statewide elected Illinois politicians would fall under type (3), unless they rose from prominent Chicago positions.	Hillary Clinton
Low	Subject is notable to select Chicagoans for its role as a person or institution associated with Chicagoland. Subject is not particularly notable or significant to a wider range of readers. Examples would be (1) other buildings and narrow topics, (2) professional athletes of moderate importance who briefly played in Chicago, or (3) alumni of local colleges and universities that have become notable for non-Chicago related roles. Note: Persons may be listed in Chicago related categories due to their place of birth, place where they were reared as youths, place where they were educated (high school, college, graduate school), place where they performed their notable service/acts, or place where they resided as adults. Generally, an article subject notable enough to merit a biographical Wikipedia entry is a role model (albeit positive or negative) for many who are current and recent students of the institution of which they are an alumnus, and who have an interest in that particular field of notability. For example, notable politicians may be important to law students, and/or government and history majors; Wall Street chieftains may be important to business school students, and/or economics and finance majors; and famous scientists may be important to medical students and/or other science majors. However, alumni of local colleges and universities who have not stayed in the Chicago area will be of less importance to the project and thus have a lower "Importance" rating than "people from the Chicago area" who are more likely to have roots in the region and/or have stayed in the area.	Smith Museum of Stained Glass Windows
NA	Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc.	Category:Chicago
???	Subject importance has not yet been assessed.	???

It seems that there is a very serious misunderstanding of what Talkpage project banners are for. A talk page banner is not part of an article. As such is not intended for the reader or for the purpose of appeasing an individual biographical subject. Talk page banners are suppose to provide information for editors. In the case of a project banner, it's purpose is to provide information to project members about the importance, quality and development of an article. A well done banner will place an article properly on a quality scale for all editors and a priority/importance scale for project members. In fact, it will place the article in a category for project members according to these scales. It may also point to underdevelopment by noting photo, infobox, and/or map omissions. In addition, it may point to related projects or support groups that also have an editorial interest in the subject matter. A talk page banner is not really a tool for the regular editors of a page who may or may not be interested in many of the projects that attach a banner to a page. A talk page project banner is for guidance of project members. It is not really appropriate for non-members of a project to make decisions on what information a particular project should assemble for its own purposes in its attempt to improve the encyclopedia. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 14:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with your goals and objectives. I just question whether individuals whose sole connection to Chicago is that they attended a university in the city have enough of a nexus to justify inclusion within a Wikiproject, in the same way that a professional athlete who played in town or an art exhibit would, as provided in your priority grid. The fact that the word "Chicago" only appears in Corzine's article in the name of the school and the site of an early job, is simply insufficient to show the necessary connection. I'm sure that there are a few "select persons" who'll be interested in anyone whose stepped foot in a particular place, and that any person can be a role model. But I would rate the alumni categories as not showing much more of a connection than an imaginary [[Category:People who have changed planes at O'Hare International Airport]]. I have worked extensively on Wikiproject:New Jersey, and I would never think of listing all Rutgers University alumni as being connected to the project, nor those of the dozens of other colleges and universities in the state. The connection arising from college attendance in and of itself is simply insufficient to establish the necessary connection to this or any other WikiProject, other than a college-connected effort. Alansohn 16:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a matter of opinion and will differ from regional project to regional project. As stated in the revised chart above the alumni category may have differing importance for various regional projects. As stated above, for a college town WP, an alumni association may warrant a higher priority than for a more diverse one. It may be the case that WP:Illinois does not wish to include all alumni of each institution in the state. Whereas a given city in a state may choose to include alumni. Chicago is certainly no college town. However, the current decision scheme of the Chicago WP is to include all alumni and list them as importance=low unless there is an additional connection or justification. In a sense, it is a banner for our project to manage articles in which we may have an interest. We currently wish to use this as a defining Chicago category. For prominent individuals, the banner may be no more significant than a banner stating that the girl you sat next to in kindergarden is still interested in you. However, this is how I believe we should assess relevant articles. Corzine is certainly as connected to Chicago as a non-notable Chicago athlete who played here briefly and went on to prominence elsewhere. I would prefer if you left our banner alone. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 17:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The Project ( or rather Tony; it seems to be short on other members) is free to watch as many members of Category:University of Chicago alumni as they wish. This banner, however, is contrary to clear consensus here; please leave it off. This is not the first instance in which this sort of parochialism was been demonstrated; and if it comes back, I will be happy to sign an RFC on this disruptive editor. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

PM Anderson, I find it odd that you would set policy for project in which you are a non-member. Which of the participants here do you consider to be members of the WP:WPChi project? I have not called on my editors to begin assessing articles because our bot administrator took off a week and a half midway through assessing the categories we are interested in. I am confident that once we complete the various phases of the inventory process and we undertake assesment you will have a different perspective of our project. Please do not set policy on how my project administers its template and please do not attempt to own this page. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I observe Tony claims that it's "his" project; who has ownership issues? As for this page, there is consensus against this tag. Please take it away. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

To all especially User:Grammaticus Repairo and User:Pmanderson, Last month we went through extensive debate on the propriety of non project members editing a project tag on an article. I agreed to engage Pmanderson in a dispute resolution on the matter. After discussions about the matter at User:TonyTheTiger/DR_bot and User_talk:Pmanderson#DR_summary I attempted to distill the debate to the final topic for debate at WP:DR. Pmanderson then chose to discontinue communications. May take is that upon reviewing what the argument boils down to he felt less strongly about his case. If any of you is willing to step into Pmandersons shoes and accept a WP:DR I am willing to continue such debates. This is what I believe is the summary of the argument at this point. I invite anyone to step in for Pmanderson at dispute resolution on this matter. Otherwise, I will continue to replace the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} tag on this page. It remains the only page of the 9800 with the WP:WPChi tag since April that does not seem to "get it", which should cause one to question the keepers of the page and not the placers of the tag. TonyTheTiger 16:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding a link

I work for the America's Most Wanted Safety Center, a new branch of America's Most Wanted getting away from the capturing of criminals, and branching out to all aspects of safety. I feel a link to our post about Jon Corzine's crash would be appropriate and mutually beneficial, particularly because it includes a filmed interview with him about the crash. The link is http://www.amw.com/safety/?p=61 please consider it. Jrosenfe 14:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Weak coverage of his position as CEO of Goldman Sachs

I'd just like to point out that this article has very weak coverage of Corzine's job as CEO of Goldman Sachs. --JHP 07:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Reorganizing random comments

Isn't he the *junior* senator?

Strange as it may seem, he isn't. Frank Lautenberg retired in 2000. When he did, he lost all seniority he had, so when he came back in 2002, he was junior to Senator Corzine, because technically Corzine became a Senator in 2000 while Lautenberg became one (this time around) in 2002.

I oppose the usage of "He also supports stronger federal gun control laws..." because the a person with the opposite POV would "support weaker federal gun control laws". Since the antinym of more restrictive is less restrictive, and both terms are fairly NPOV, I propose replacing stronger with more restrictive. --Hcheney 23:31, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Restrictive has a negative connotation. I don't feel it's stricly NPOV. But I'd certainly be open to something other than stronger. It was the best wording I could come up with at the time. How about "Corzine supports tighter controls on guns"? --Meelar 00:57, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

P.S. Let me add that it's good to see you back.

Thanks, what can I say? I just can't stay away from wikipedia. I don't think more restrictive is negative, for example, I think most politicians would love to be labelled as "favoring a more restrictive policy on child pornography". Corzine is a proud proponent of gun control and represents a state that has some of the strongest/tightest/most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. I doubt Corzine would use such a neutral term as more restrictive in his campaign material, during the 2000 campaign Corzine attempted to portray himself as a warrior that would fight the NRA, and support registration of all guns. In order to be truly neutral, we should avoid such adjectives and merely list the proposals he supports, or has supported in the past, and let the readers decide for themselves. --Hcheney 16:07, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What about the term "more/less comprehensive" as opposed to "more/less restrictive?" That to me would describe merely the scope of the legislation's powers rather than assigning a subtle endorsement or criticism. Just a suggestion. Sleeper99999 11:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

In the U.S., I think, gun ownership is viewed as a fundamental liberty--thus the "gun rights" movement. Child porn is not seen that way. I think Corzine's opponenets might use the "more restrictive" label. If you're not happy with "tighter", though, by all means, change it up. Yours, Meelar 22:41, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I doubt most New Jerseyans view gun ownership as a fundamental liberty, even Bob Franks, Corzine's Republican opponent in the 2000 election took substantially the same postitions on guns as Corzine in the campaign. However, more importantly than the wording on a single senator's article is the work that needs to be done is so far as NPOV and content for the body of American firearms topics prior to the major political storm that is brewing due to the sunsetting of the federal assault weapons ban. --Hcheney 02:48, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Of the New Jerseyans who do view gun ownership as a fundamental liberty, most keep quiet about it, recognizing that it's a futile effort falling on deaf ears in the Garden State.