|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons 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 . If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Note: This page refers to a person who is currently running for election to political office (President of the Cook County Board). Therefore, the objectivity of the information (pro or con) may be influenced by those who have an interest in this election.
Points of contention
I added this into the article:
Since then, Peraica has earned a reputation as a reformer, along with Democratic commissioners Forrest Claypool, Mike Quigley, and Larry Suffredin. Together, these four worked against former Cook County Board President John Stroger to reduce the county budget through the consolidation of services and job reduction.
How is this "POV"? News accounts of Peraica tend to cast him in this light, and fellow commissioner Forrest Claypool is described in his article as a reformer, along with Peraica. Perhaps this section of the article could be reworded to be more in line with Claypool's? How about something along these lines?
Upon election, Peraica aligned himself on the Board with fellow freshmen Commissioners Forrest Claypool (D) and Larry Suffredin (D). The three were joined by sophomore Commissioner Mike Quigley (D). In December 2003, the four reformers garnered enough votes to defeat Cook County Board President John Stroger's FY 2004 budget, something which had not happened in three decades. The next year (FY 2005), the County Board rejected Stroger's planned tax increases.
In addition, we have the matter of the still unverified claim that Marco Peraica "had never held a steady job before his father was elected commissioner". I am removing this claim from the article immediately, until such a time as it can be substantiated.
By the way, why is the religion of Peraica's wife relevant?
Oh, and here's a good article about him that we can use as a reference: 
--gavindow 17:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I am also adding a section specifically about criticisms, because there are a few others that ought to be mentioned besides the fact that his son works in the Cook County Clerk's office. --gavindow 17:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Can we PLEASE discuss major changes?
Skweaques' recent edits have deleted important content and inserted material that would fit better in the article about Todd Stroger. I suggest that the content about Stroger be taken there, and criticisms section of this article be returned (as the edit I'll perform shortly will do). --gavindow 03:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
My radionale for my changes
Here's my rationale for what I included: -The content about Stroger's controversial nomination is integral to the race. It’s Cook County, after all, where Democrats out number Republicans 3 to 1. The story surrounding Stroger is one of the primary reasons this race is as close as it is. Everything I added was sourced to one of the four major Chicago area newspapers (Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times, Daily Herald and Daily Southtown).
- The Chicago Reader is hardly a newspaper of record. I kept the same content you had, but sourced it to one of the 4 major papers, the newspapers of record in Cook County.
- The facts in the criticism section are sourced, but the accusations of “noeptism” and “cronyism” are not. Without sources, those shouldn’t be there.
- The Pioneer Press – which serves all of north and northwest Cook County – and the Star Newspapers – which serves south and southwest Cook County – endorsements are pertinent because both groups, along with the Daily Southtown, are Sun-Times newsgroup publications. All have opted to break with the Sun-Times’ endorsement of Todd Stroger to print their own endorsements for Tony Peraica. Crain’s Chicago Business is the business paper of record for a large Chicagoland business community. --Skweaques
- Regarding "nepotism" and "cronyism" those words are there in an effort to explain why people would criticize Peraica. If you have a better way of saying it, that's fine (frankly, I'm not entirely happy with it myself), but it's better than not attempting to explain that he's been attacked over his son's job, for example.
- Also, take a look at Tammy Duckworth's entry. There's a section on endorsements that works very well, for two reasons. One, it summarized the endorsement for each one, and two, it is limited to major Chicagoland newspapers. I'm a Chicago resident, and I've heard of the Daily Herland and the Chicago Southtown, but not the Pioneer Press or the Star Newspapers. At a certain point, we have to say that some endorsements aren't really worth being mentioned in Wikipedia. The facts surrounding these endorsements are interesting, however, and might be worth mention. Perhaps something along the lines of "Although Chicago's other major newspaper, the Chicago Sun-Times, endorsed Stroger, many other Sun-Times Media Group newspapers endorsed Peraica, as well as several Sun-Times columnists" would work better.
- Crain's Chicago Business, on the other hand, I don't think merits mention. Crain's is targeted at a specific audience (the business world).
- --gavindow 19:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph about Todd Stroger and polls
In a controversial move, Todd Stroger was placed on the ballot by the Cook County Democratic Central Committee on July 18, 2006 to fill the ballot vacancy created by Board President John Stroger when he resigned as Board President, Commissioner and nominee of the Democratic Party following a March 14 stroke. Todd Stroger was chosen over County Commissioner Bobbie L. Steele, US Representative Danny K. Davis and County Commissioner Forrest Claypool, who narrowly lost the Democratic Primary to John Stroger. Claypool has been a vocal critic of the process that selected Todd Stroger and the Democratic Party nominee, publicly stating that he will neither endorse nor vote for Stroger.
This entire paragraph makes no mention of Tony Peraica. The only reason it appears to be here is to make Todd Stroger look bad. This is a newsworthy controversy, and the section of Stroger's entry that addresses it could certainly be improved -- but please do it THERE. This article is about Tony Peraica. It's worth a mention, but not an entire paragraph.
I have no idea why the dates I added to the paragraph about polls were removed (I suspect this was an oversight), but since they're relevant, I'm adding them back in.
Overall, I suggest something like this:
Stroger replaced his father on the ballot on July 18, 2006 after his father suffered a stroke. Stroger won out over several other more prominent Demcorats, which has fueled a controversy around his candidacy. This controversy has been a key factor in a race that normally would not be competitive, with Peraica's campaign running about even with Stroger. A Chicago Tribune poll released on October 16, 2006 showed Peraica and Stroger in a statistical tie. Additionally, Peraica’s campaign released a poll on October 10, 2006 showing him with a 48%-40% lead over Stroger. Should Peraica win the election, he would be the first Republican to do so in forty years. 
--gavindow 19:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Political charges, including criticism of "runaway spending," should be presented as views and not as fact. I have made changes to reflect this more appropriate perspective for a nonpartisan resource such as Wikipedia. Also, I removed the repeated references to the "machine," which a previous editor attributes to Daley, Stroger, and others. Presenting Peraica as the opponent of a corrupt machine - as a matter of fact rather than opinion - would be the same as declaring in a 2004 article on John Kerry that Kerry is running against a "warmongering neoconservative clique." Such statements MIGHT very well be true from my perspective (in other words, I might agree with them), but they have no place on Wikipedia.