Talk:Rudy Giuliani

Validation of article performed by WIKICHECK. August 17 2006 12:10pm. WikiCheck 12:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Archives: 1

*** PLEASE PUT NEW SECTIONS AT THE BOTTOM ***

Law Firms

I added the paragraph about his pre-mayoral law firms. I'm new to editing articles, so I hope it's okay. -- Tooptoo [02:18, 1 January 2007 168.103.223.60]

Political Views of Rudy Giuliani

For John McCain we have an extensive list of political views, and for Hillary Clinton we have Political views of Hillary Rodham Clinton. But we don't have hardly anything for Rudy. Simesa 00:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of Political views, let's be fair about his views. Giuliani called for the construction of a fence and said today that new Americans must be expected to be able to read and write in English. See the addition that I added under the Illegal Immigration section and the citation. --70.152.143.172 06:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I've create a Political views section, and have started to populate it with material. I moved the immigration material mentioned just above into it, since it didn't belong in the Mayoralty section. Wasted Time R 18:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

911

I think the 911 section is too negative about Guiliani. Criticism is the easiest thing in the world to create about people-- and this article plays too much to the lowest common denominator in that department. People saw for themselves what kind of leader Guliani was during 911 and that's why he enjoys huge popularily today.

Phil

168.103.223.60 02:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

But we've all seen the media get the facts absolutely backwards, as they did on 9/11. For instance, no one can dispute the facts of 9/11, like the fact that Rudy's critical command center was put in an insane place by Rudy himself, and even his supporters said it was dangerous, long before it proved to be deadly.

The very fact that Wikipedia uses mainstream media as its source means most sourcing cannot be accurate. The media moguls, for instance, are mostly cigar buddies of Rudy and that's well-known, but it's not like the NYTimes is going to report that! There are literally millions of examples of mainstream media reporting the exact opposite of the facts. I've had thousands of stories written about me in the Times and on TV and not once did they fact check anything.

The 9/11 section is not negative enough, if you know all the facts. For instance, Rudy got caught lying about his illegally destroying all the evidence and melting down the steel and shipping it to China. But only Newsday told some of the truth about it. The rest of the media continued to shill for a "popular" mayor who gave them billions in corporate welfare. EX: reread the preface of Time's "Man Of The Year" issue and they admit that Rudy in no way meets their criteria. They gave it to him because Rudy had given AOL/ Time Warner over a billion in taxdollars and he was their close pal---facts they never disclose. And you'll see that the media almost never discloses their serious conflicts of interest. EX: how on earth does the NYTimes or the Post praise Rudy without disclosing the billion dollars he gave both in defiance of taxpayers??

christopher empiregoodness@yahoo.com

Iraq

Does anyone know what Giuliani's position on the war in Iraq is? [21:56, 6 February 2007 220.239.204.81]

Org work

The organization of this article had become pretty bad - inappropriate material in the intro, no early years section, the post-mayoral section had way too many choppy short sections, the personal life material was scattered and lacked simple date information - so I've endeavoured to improve it. Wasted Time R 00:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Smoking Gun Research

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0212072giuliani1.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yeago (talk • contribs) 18:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

Immigration

I very strongly disagree with Giuliani on his sheltering of illegal aliens, but I believe it is only reasonable to cite what he actually said, including his reasons, rather than Michelle Malkin's polemic (if not at all unfair) characterization of it. 69.143.31.101 16:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Dan Marsh

I changed an immigration quote in the mayoralty section to more closely reflect Giuliani's views on immigration and how they relate to New York City. I didn't throw out the old quote, but instead put it with the separate article on Giuliani's political views. Jmegill 19:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Transvestism

Why is Giuliani's transvestism consistently hidden from Wikipedia readers?? He is the only mayor in NY history known to have appeared in women's clothes on multiple occasions in public. This would surely be worthy of mention alongside the abundant personal trivia listed in the article even were he not already the subject of much speculation as to his morals and even were he not running for president, but given that this issue is the subject of much consternation on the part of right-wing commentators I can't imagine why a well referenced mention of it should be repeatedly excised. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.155.63.6 (talk) 19:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

His few appearances in drag are mentioned, in Rudy Giuliani#Media management. There is no evidence that he is a transvestite, however; he just did the drag as a lark. Wasted Time R 19:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Nor is there any evidence that his cross dressing was just done "as a lark." Many New Yorkers and political observers believe otherwise....The current wording seems adequate for now but the article could use a section to address the growing speculation over Giuliani's private life and morals141.155.63.6 18:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

True, though cross-dressing isn't a "moral" issue. Bill Maher had a good discussion on this on his most recent show, combining jokes with some seriousness. I'll paraphrase, but he essentially quipped that doing it once or twice for a charity routine is one thing, but going that far on numerous occasions may mean he's got some hidden issues for which the religious right wouldn't be thrilled. --AWF

To my knowledge he did it three times, twice at a roast/charity event and once on a TV comedy show. How does that rate? You know, New Yorkers take these things in stride.... Wasted Time R 13:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Most of us _did_ take his lifestyle in stride...the lifestyle that is....It was the hypocrisy of the moralizing authoritarian flaunting his private life that grated on so many of us... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.125.223.18 (talk) 23:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

If you can find a quote where Giuliani said that appearing in drag is immoral, then add it. Otherwise you have nothing. Wasted Time R 00:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I've seen the Maher clip now. I think he used multiple still photos from each of Giuliani's three appearances, to make the total number look greater than it really is. He also threw in a still from Saturday Night Live that wasn't even drag, but rather a silly male costume with a fake pompadour. Wasted Time R 12:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Election

I added an election tag since Giuliani is a candidate for 2008. JQLibet 18:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Mayorial Elections

I changed the statement that he was the first elected Republican Mayor of New York since Lindsay's re-election in 1969 to Lindsay's election in 1965 due to the fact that Lindsay was not the Republican nominee in the 1969 election. If you were to argue that Lindsay was not the Republican nominee but he still was a Republican then you would need to change the 1997 reelection comment regarding Rudy being the first re-elected Republican Mayor since LaGuardia in 1941 to Lindsay in 1969. Since the LaGuardia remark was sourced (23)..... Reddawnz 19:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Need semi-protection

The rate of anon vandalism has gone way up lately. This article needs semi-protection (blocking anons and newly registered users), the same as Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton and others of this ilk have. Wasted Time R 22:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, anons have been making some useful edits to the article, so I guess this call is premature. Wasted Time R 03:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Subarticles created

Note that subarticles have now been created for Rudy Giuliani presidential campaign, 2008 and Political views of Rudy Giuliani, and the material here moved into them; this is in line with how Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, and other similar articles have been structured. Wasted Time R 03:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Creating a daughter article, to present one part of a subject in more detail without cluttering the main article, is fine. In such instances, however, Wikipedia:Summary style calls for the main article to retain a brief summary of the material that's been spun off. I think it's especially important that a bio of a politician retain at least the basic information about his or her political views. I'll try to create such a summary. (Admittedly, summarizing often raises the touchiest NPOV issues, because there's some POV inherent in deciding what's important enough to be in the main article, but we have to make the effort.) JamesMLane t c 03:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've added this for the Political views section in the main article. I've done what most of the other 2008 candidates have there, a description of poll results showing how the American public views them on the L-M-C spectrum. Trying to otherwise summarize political views is, as you suggest, a foolhardy enterprise. Wasted Time R 23:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I said it was difficult, not foolhardy. I think it's something that has to be attempted. Poll results about overall orientation are worth including, but the basic bio article should have more than just the politician's image. There should be some information about his or her views on major issues, for the benefit of a reader who comes to the article with no prior knowledge. Trying to purge the article of all such information is JamesMLane t c 07:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

"Rudy is a businessman"

Does charging people for speeches make someone a businessman? myclob [17:15, 24 February 2007]

If you have a cite saying he's done nothing else in his companies than that, please provide. Wasted Time R 23:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Why is Romney's religion mentioned and not Rudy's?

myclob 17:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It is, in both the infobox and the Early life section. Wasted Time R 21:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Crime statistics

Our article currently states that, when Giuliani ran for Mayor in 1993, the city "was suffering from an all-time high in the crime rate". The source cited in support of that assertion says, in its first sentence no less, that "crime in New York City took a downturn starting around 1990...." Thus, our article flatly misstates the facts. It adopts the mass media's view that the decline in the crime rate must have come under the mayoralty of a white former prosecutor, and that the city's first black mayor couldn't possibly have had anything to do with it. We shouldn't join in the practice of giving Giuliani a free pass on the crime issue. JamesMLane t c 05:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal Life

Current article somewhat whitewashes his marriage to Regina Peruggi and never mentions that he began seeing Donna Hanover as early as 1982, according to an interview with Donna Hanover, which calls into question his rationale for having his marriage with Peruggi annulled. Also references to Alan Placa, which support claims Giuliani knew all along of his familial relationship with Peruggi, have been removed. Alan Placa also adds to the 'controversy' topic. Joseph chapman 18:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added the origins of the Hanover relationship. I'd like to have a second source on the date of the Peruggi annulment. And you didn't give any source on Placa. Wasted Time R 21:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I got the second source, so I added that bit ... but I'd like something more authoritative on when exactly the annulment was issued. I've begun adding Placa, but need more on that too. Wasted Time R 00:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Relevant and not redundant

An editor repeatedly removes the following. It is neither redudant nor irrelevant: The New York Daily News reported that Giuliani learned of his daughter's acceptance to Harvard only upon reading of the admission in the Daily News. Giuliani has been absent from his son's golf tournaments and from his daughter's starring performances in theatrical productions. Dogru144 17:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The article already says that Giuliani is estranged from his children, "missing major events in their lives and sometimes going long stretches without talking to them," and gives the same Daily News cite. You're just repeating the same material later in the paragraph, to no useful purpose other than maliciously piling on. Wasted Time R 17:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Explanation of my edit

User:Wasted Time R made a wholesale revert with the ES "revert back to last sane version without anti-Giuliani attacks everywhere; I will reapply legit changes". Many "legit changes" were, however, lost in this revert and not restored (or possibly messed up in subsequent edits). Some points that I'm fixing, with rationale:

• It's generally a bad idea to include statements like "In the wake of the attacks, Giuliani was hailed for his leadership during the crisis." This makes it sound like a conclusion that the article is reaching, rather than a report of an opinion held by some. Better is to say that he was "hailed by some", to make clear that it's an opinion, and still better is to include a citation to at least one prominent spokesperson for that point of view (see Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words). Some places in this article still need citation. At some point, if citations aren't forthcoming, the report of the opinion should be deleted altogether. As an interim improvement, "was hailed by some" (and similar phrases) should replace the simple "was hailed".
• There was criticism of Giuliani concerning the siting of the Emergency Management Center, and the report of this criticism should not have been deleted. I've created a subheading on "Before the attacks" to accommodate that material. That section can also include information about his monumental foul-up concerning the first responders' radios, as soon as someone writes it up with citation to sources.
• It's POV to say that September 11 was "the defining moment" of Giuliani's term in office. The objective fact is that he was highly visible. Certainly many people praised his alleged "leadership" during that time, an opinion that can be reported with proper attribution and citation. On the other hand, there are many of us who believe that he received considerable favorable publicity based on little more than the happenstance that he was the Mayor at the time of the attack. ("All he did was act like a compassionate human being for a few weeks--granted, quite a feat for a man who announced his plans for divorce on TV before he told his wife--and people were calling him a hero." [1]) It's also puffery to say, "He balanced the need to make hundreds of decisions directly and immediately, to delegate hundreds of others, and to visit the injured and console the families of the dead."

I haven't compared the different versions with regard to their treatment of adultery and other personal issues. JamesMLane t c 22:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't accusing you of all the bad edits ... but there was a ton of junk in there, conspiracy theories about why the WTC towers went down, long-winded edits about Dinkins right in the intro, etc. I assure you I am not trying to whitewash Giuliani ... I've been adding Controversies entries, and have tried to do my best describing the timeline of his tangled personal life, as you can see from my recent edits. But I'm trying to do it in a neutral way, not slanted. Wasted Time R 22:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Having survived the editing of the Bush and Kerry articles in the fall of 2004, I know that there's often such a swirl of edits that keeping track of who did what when is more trouble than it's worth. I posted as I did because I believe that, especially in articles about controversial subjects, explanations of significant edits (beyond what will fit in an ES) can help the collaboration process. JamesMLane t c 23:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm okay with most of your edits, but "hailed by many" is more accurate than "hailed by some" (I could try to dig out a post-9/11 opinion poll), and your new "Before the attacks" subsection was duplicative of the existing "Criticism for lack of preparedness before the 9/11 attacks" subsection; I've merged your content into that one. Wasted Time R 23:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You also don't seem to credit enough the anti-Giuliani material that is already in the article, such as Sharpton's "Bozo could have lead us" quote, the handling of air quality, etc. Wasted Time R 23:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I can also say that edit battles over how Giuliani is characterized in the intro will go on forever. On the Hillary Rodham Clinton intro, we solved that by stripping the intro of anything that wasn't an obvious incontrovertible fact. Makes it very short, if nothing else ... Wasted Time R 23:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

There's a problem with the organization of the article, with material relating to 9/11 being split up the way it is. Similarly, the placement of the Sharpton quotation exemplifies the scattering of material relating to the different reactions to his post-9/11 actions. I think that "hailed by many" should be removed but I won't bother doing it right now, because I want to think about addressing this overall problem. The same section has a "Giuliani was widely praised...." sentence, added to all the stuff about "America's Mayor", and even his appearance at a single baseball game. This is overkill (and would be even if bolstered by a citation or two). JamesMLane t c 07:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Horrible paragraph

Let me point out a horrible paragraph. It's under the major heading "Mayoral campaigns, 1989, 1993, 1997", and within that heading, it's under "1993 campaign and election".

Here's the paragraph: "Giuliani promised a return to social order, addressing day-to-day issues rather than past or imminent crises: Poverty, welfare, and the prevalence of homeless panhandlers on streets and subways, and improving New York City's image via improvements on crime, infrastructure and urban revitalization."

It's unclear whether terms that come after the colon ("Poverty, welfare", etc) have to do with "day to day issues" or "past or imminent crises". This should be made explicit. It's tempting to delete the entire paragraph. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dlbarber (talk • contribs) 23:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

Agreed. I've junked it. I think the next paragraph with the RG quote was saying the same thing, anyway. Wasted Time R 23:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

"America's Mayor"?

"His public visibility in the days following the attacks earned him the nickname "America's Mayor." The statement about the purported nickname seems factually implausible -- does anyone actually use that term to address or refer to RG? It's also, obviously, not NPOV. If someone, somewhere, actually referred to him that way, and that fact is somehow noteworthy, just say that. Bassomatic 21:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

This is an American thing ... there is a tradition in sports of anointing certain teams, such as the Dallas Cowboys in American football, as "America's Team". Then other things began being called "America's <whatever>", and the Rudy label came from that. Wasted Time R 22:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's quite common and notable; the nickname was given by Oprah Winfrey, accoridng to The Economist [2]. It doesn't take much basic research to turn up that Google News Archive finds 580 hits for giuliani "america's mayor", most dating from before his current presidential race, and many even in articles that are negative about him. --Delirium 13:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

"Sir Rudolph"???

I'm torn between being amused and being appalled that the intro line identifies Giuliani as "Sir Rudolph"! Giuliani is an American. No one carries that sort of title in the United States, regardless of what someone whom the Founders would have called a "foreign potentate" might have bestowed on him. It has zero validity. Unless "Sir Rudy" is in the process of becoming a British citizen, I believe strongly that this appelation should be removed. Anyone? --Michael K. Smith 02:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

You caught a bad edit that was up for a couple of hours. It isn't normally like that. Remember, with Wikipedia it's not what you read, it's when you read it! Wasted Time R 02:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Harding Scandal

Why would Harding's child porn conviction not be mentionable alongside his other felony? Giuliani selected the son of a close political ally to head a vitally important city agency despite a complete absence of qualifications on the appointee's part. The appointee turns out to be not only a crook but a collector of child porn. Giuliani was elected on a "return morality to NYC" platform and as mayor repeatedly attacked those who did not agree with his own values. Both of Harding's convictions demonstrate his character and it seems to me reflect on the character of the man who appointed him. The full nature of the convictions of any Giuliani appointee are certainly more relevant to this article than Andrew's golf prowess.... 141.155.63.6 18:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If Giuliani makes an unqualified patronage hire who turns out to use his position to embezzle from the public trough, that's a very reasonable criticism of Giuliani. The crime is connected to the appointment. If this hire also happens to dabble in some hidden personal vice, that happens to get discovered by accident in the course of the embezzlement investigation, that's a private crime, not a public crime, and one that's not really something that can be held against Giuliani. Wasted Time R 18:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Citation Needed

In the Crime section, the following quote appears:

"Bratton, not Giuliani, was featured on the cover of Time magazine in 1996 and was subsequently fired by Giuliani. Many believe that Giuliani fired Bratton in order to receive full media credit for New York's improved crime rate. [29]"

The problem is the citation [29] is to the 1996 Time Magazine article. It does not back up in anyway the claim that Giuliani fired Bratton to get full media credit. I am removing that claim until someone backs it up with evidence.--GFrege 23:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Citation now given, and mention of Giuliani forcing out Bratton reworded and restored. Wasted Time R 01:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)