Talk:Terry McAuliffe: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:09, 26 October 2021

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Terry McAuliffe article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 90 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Politics and Government B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Virginia B‑class High‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

New York (state): Syracuse B‑class Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syracuse, New York, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

GreenTech

The state of Mississippi lost millions of dollars investing in GreenTech Automotive. According to one report, GreenTech reportedly owes the state of Mississippi $2.85 million, even after making an overdue $150,000 loan payment. ^[1] Patrick McCarthy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CFAA:7110:2C5D:398:3E88:9369 (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1108421_greentech-auto-shutters-its-doors-closes-mississippi-factory

added reflisttalk template for organization. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup required

This article, for some reason, repeats the subject's surname in almost every single sentence. In the first subsection, for example:

In 1985, McAuliffe helped found the Federal City National Bank, a Washington, D.C.–based local bank. In January 1988, when McAuliffe was thirty years old, the bank's board elected McAuliffe as chairman, making him the youngest chairman in the United States Federal Reserve Bank's charter association. In 1991, McAuliffe negotiated a merger with Credit International Bank, which he called his "greatest business experience." McAuliffe became the vice-chairman of the newly merged bank.

That is a paragraph of four sentences, in which his surname is repeated five times. As far as I can see the entire article is written like this. So, I've added a cleanup tag, requesting that it be written in normal English: in about 80% of cases, the surname should be replaced by a pronoun. 51.6.138.24 (talk) 09:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Around 70 McAuliffes have been changed to personal pronouns. Please restore the service tag if you think more should be done. Cheers! --Woko Sapien (talk) 16:14, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar mistake

There's a grammar mistake in the education section that should read 'vetoed' not 'voted' for. I can't correct it because the page is locked. 70.191.130.23 (talk) 00:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the mistake's been corrected since. Feel free to suggest any other improvements you can think of. Cheers! --Woko Sapien (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading in the education section

It says the supposed book ban bill was supported by Republicans and social conservatives when in fact about half of Democrats voted for it along with the Republican majority at the time. It's misleading as it stands. 70.191.130.23 (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources indicate that Democrats opposed the bill. Per the sources, it looks like the only social conservative group that opposed the bill was the Family Foundation of Virginia, which I added. I personally can't view the link you included above. --PerpetuityGrat (talk) 20:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All Dems voted to sustain his veto, however, 13 voted for the bill in 2016 and another 8 voted for it in 2017. Both of those figures are for the house and one Dem senator voted for in 2016 and 2017, respectively. The point is a group of Dems voted for it in both 2016 and 2017 but the article leads one to believe it was only Republicans who supported it. 70.191.130.23 (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.greencarreports.com/news/1108421_greentech-auto-shutters-its-doors-closes-mississippi-factory

[1]

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 It says the supposed book ban bill was supported by Republicans and social conservatives when in fact [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?161+sum+HB516 about half of Democrats voted for it] along with the Republican majority at the time. It's misleading as it stands. [[Special:Contributions/70.191.130.23|70.191.130.23]] ([[User talk:70.191.130.23|talk]]) 19:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 :The sources indicate that Democrats opposed the bill. Per the sources, it looks like the only social conservative group that opposed the bill was the [[Family Foundation of Virginia]], which I added. I personally can't view the link you included above. --[[User:PerpetuityGrat|PerpetuityGrat]] ([[User talk:PerpetuityGrat|talk]]) 20:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
+::All Dems voted to [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?161+vot+HV1388+HB0516 sustain his veto], however, [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?161+vot+HV1158+HB0516 13 voted for the bill] in 2016 and another [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?171+vot+HV2615+HB2191 8 voted for it in 2017]. Both of those figures are for the house and one Dem senator voted for in [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?161+vot+SV0750HB0516+HB0516 2016] and [https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?171+vot+SV0723HB2191+HB2191 2017], respectively. The point is a group of Dems voted for it in both 2016 and 2017 but the article leads one to believe it was only Republicans who supported it. [[Special:Contributions/70.191.130.23|70.191.130.23]] ([[User talk:70.191.130.23|talk]]) 23:08, 26 October 2021 (UTC)